I     BOOK  CARD 

a         Please  keep  this  cflird  fn 
«  book  pocket 


s 

J  1 


UNIVERSITY  OF  N.C.  AT  CHAPEL  HILL 


10002344946 


THE  UBRARY  OF  THE 
UNIVERSITY  OF 
NORTH  CAROLINA 
AT  CHAPEL  HILL 


ENDOWED  BY  THE 
DIALECTIC  AND  PHILANTHROPIC  ^ 
SOCIETIES 


BX6i9$  1  r^; 

.A65  ^ 

1853  1  IL 
V.  2  ^ 


UNIVERSITY  OF  N.C  AT  CHAPEL  HILL 


This  book  is  due  at  the  LOUIS  R.  WILSON  LIBRARY  on  the 
last  date  stamped  under  "Date  Due."  If  not  on  hold  it  may  be 
renewed  by  bringing  it  to  the  library. 


DATE 
DUE 

DATE  „„ 
DUE 

OCT-  SJ^W'^ 

»  "     '     /,  i  -    '  ' 
  i  ^  f- 

IVIAY  0  3 ! 

m 

DECi 

EC  0  4  0(K 

r 

MAY  0  221 

106 

OR?  2  5  , 

mm  

—  mi 

UUI 

)  y  w 

psw**^^"  ■  

am 

— re^ 

DEC  1  2 

'0071 

010 

farm /Va  5? J 

\ 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2015 


https://archive.org/details/worksofjamesarmi02armi_0 


4  -.^ 


% 


V/ 


if  f 


T  H  E   W  O  E  K  S 


JAMES  AEMINIUS,  D.  D., 

FORMEBLT 

PROFESSOR  OF  DIVINITY  11^  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  LEYDEK 

TRANSLATED  FEOM  THE  LATIN, 
IN  THEEE  YOLUMES. 

^  /  ^  THE  FIEST  AND  SECOND 

BY   JAMES  NICHOLS, 

A.rTnOR  OF  "  CALVINISM  AND  AKMINIANISM  COMPARED  IN  THEIK  PEINCIPLES  AND  TENDENCT." 

THE  THIED, 

WITH  A  SKETCH  OF  THE  LIFE  OF  THE  AUTHOR, 

BY  EEV.  W.  R.  BAGNALL,  A.  M. 

or  THB  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHX7ECH. 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

SEYENTT-NINE  PEIVATE  DISPTATIOFS  r  9—193 

1—  On  Theology   9 

2 —  On  the  Manner  in  which  Theology  must  be  taught   10 

3 —  On  blessedness,  the  End  of  Theology   12 

4—  On  Eeliglon    13 

5 —  On  the  rule  of  Keligion,  the  Word  of  God,  and  the  Scriptures  in  particular   14 

6 —  On  the  authority  and  certainty  of  the  Holy  Scriptures   16 

7 —  On  the  perfection  of  the  Scriptures    ,   19 

8 —  On  the  perspicuity  of  the  Scriptures   20 

9 —  On  the  meanings  and  interpretation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures   22 

10 —  On  the'efficacy  of  the  Scriptures   24 

11 —  On  Eeligion  in  a  stricter  sense   25 

12—  -0n  the  Christian  Eeligion,  its  name  and  relation  ,   2T 

13 —  On  the  Christian  Eehgion,  Avith  regard  to  the  matter  generally   28 

14—  On  the  object  of  the  Christian  Eeligion:  and,  First,  about  God,  its  primary  object, 

and  what  God  is  30 

15—  On  the  nature  of  God   33 

16—  On  the  Life  of  God  ,   35 

17—  On  tlj  e  understanding  of  God   36 

18—  On  the  Will  of  God   39 

19—  On  the  various  distinctions  of  the  Will  of  God   41 

20 —  On  the  attributes  of  God  which  come  to  be  considered  under  his  Will ;  and,  First,  on 

those  which  have  an  analogy  to  the  atfections  or  passions  in  rational  creatures   44 

21 —  On  those  attributes  of  God  which  have  some  analogy  to  the  moral  virtues,  and  which 

act  like  moderators  of  the  aifections  considered  in  the  preceding  disputation   48 

22—  On  the  power  of  God   50 

23 —  On  the  perfection,  blessedness  and  glory  of  God   52 

24—  On  Creation   54 

25— On  Angels  in  general  and  in  particular   58 

26—  On  the  creation  of  man  after  the  image  of  God   63 

27—  On  the  Lordship  or  dominion  of  God   66 

23— On  the  Providence  of  God   68 

29 — On  the  covenant  into  which  God  entered  with  our  first  PareAts   71 

80 —  ^The  manner  in  which  man  conducted  himself  in  fulfilling  the  first  Covenant,  or  on  the 

sin  of  our  first  Parents   74 

81—  On  the  eflfects  of  the  Sin  of  our  first  Parents   77 

3^— On  the  necessity  of  the  Christian  Eeligion   79 

33—  On  tlie  Eestoration  of  Man   82 

34 —  On  the  person  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ   83 

35—  On  the  priestly  office  of  Christ   85 

36—  On  the  prophetical  office  of  Christ   87 

37—  On  the  regal  office  of  Christ   90 

33— On  tlie  states  of  Christ  s  humiliation  and  exaltation   92 

39—  On  the  Will  and  Commnnd  of  God  the  Fatlier,  and  of  Christ,  by  which  they  will  and 

command  that  religion  be  performed  to  them  by  sinful  man   96 

40—  On  the  predestination  of  Believers   99 

41—  On  the  predestination  of  Means  to  the  End  103 

42 —  On  the  vocation  of  sinful  Men  to  Christ,  and  to  a  participation  of  Salvation  in  him,..  104 

43 —  On  the  Eepentance  by  which  men  answer  to  the  Divine  Vocation,  106 

44—  On  Faith  in  God  and  Christ   109 

45—  On  the  union  of  Beliavers  Avith  Christ  Ill 

46 —  On  the  communion  of  believers  with  Christ,  and  particularly  with  his  Death  113 

47 —  On  the  Communion  of  Believers  with  Christ  in  regard  to  his  Life  115 

48—  On  Justification   116 

49—  On  the  Sauctification  of  Man  .  119 

50—  On  the  Church  of  God  and  of  Christ;  Or,  on  the  church  in  general  after  the  Fall.. . .  122 


UTtcl 

l66 


vi 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

51 —  On  the  Church  of  the  Ol'l  Testament,  or  un<1er  the  Promise   124 

52 —  On  the  Church  of  the  New  Testament,  or  under  the  Gospel   12T 

53—  On  the  Head  and  the  Marks  of  the  Church   130 

54 —  On  the  Catholic  Church,  her  jxarts  and  relations   132 

65 — On  the  power  of  the  Church  in  delivering  Doctrines   135 

56 —  On  the  power  of  the  Church  in  enacting  laws   137 

57 —  On  the  power  of  the  Church  in  administering  Justice,  or  on  Ecclesiastical  Discipline,  140 

58—  On  Councils    144 

59 —  On  the  Ecclesiastical  Ministrations  of  the  New  Testament,  and  on  the  Vocation  to 

them   148 

60 —  On  Sacraments  in  General   152 

61—  On  the  Sacraments  of  the  Old  Testament — the  Tree  of  Life,  Circumcision,  and  the 

Paschal  Lamb   355 

62—  On  the  Sacraments  of  the  New  Testament  in  general   157 

63 —  On  Baptism  and  Tajdo-baptism   159 

64—  On  the  Lord's  Supper   161 

65—  On  the  Popish  Mass   162 

66—  On  the  Ave  false  Sacraments  '.   164 

67—  On  the  Worship  of  God  in  general   165 

68 —  On  the  precepts  of  Divine  Worship  in  general   167 

69 —  On  Obedience,  the  formal  object  of  all  the  Divine  Precepts   169 

70 —  On  obedience  to  the  Commands  of  God  in  general   170 

71 —  On  the  material  Object  of  the  precepts  of  the  Law  in  general   172 

72 —  On  the  Love.  Fear,  Trust  and  Honor,  which  are  due  from  Man  to  God   173 

73 —  On  particular  acts  of  Obedienc  ^,  or  those  which  are  prescribed  in  each  precept,  or 

concerning  the  Decalogue  in  general   175 

74 —  On  the  First  Commadd  in  the  Decalogue   187 

75 —  On  the  Second  Command  in  the  Decalogue   180 

76—  On  the  Third  Precept  in  the  I  'ecalogue   184 

77 —  On  the  Fourth  Commaudin  the  Decalogue   186 

78—  On  the  Fifth  Commandment  in  the  Decalogue   189 

79—  On  the  Sixth  Precept   193 

DISSERTATION  ON  THE  TRUE  AND  -GENUINE  SENSE  OF  THE  SEVENTH 
ClIArTER  OF  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  KOMANS   195—453 

Introduction   217 

FIRST  FAKT,  221—353. 

1—  The  Thes  is  to  be  proved   221 

2—  The  connection  of  the  Seventh  Chapter  with  the  Sixth   230 

Verse  the  Fourteenth   245 

Fifteenth   252 

Sixteenth   25© 

Seventeenth   258 

Eighteenth  and  Ninel<3enth   267 

Twentieth   284 

Twent3'-first   285 

Twenty-second  and  Twenty -third   287 

Twenty-fourth   323 

Twenty-fifth     827 

8 — ^Recapitulation   335 

4 — The  connection  between  the  Seventh  and  Eighth  Chapters   344 

SECOND  PART,  353—388. 
l_The  opinion  which  is  to  be  corroborated  by  Testimonies   853 

2 —  The  most  ancient  and  respectable  of  the  Christian  Fathers  approve  of  our  Interpreta- 

tion   354 

3—  The  Opinion  of  St.  AuguPtine   366 

4—  Our  opinion  is  supported  by  several  writers  of  the  Middle  Ages   375 

5 —  The  favorable  testimony  of  Modern  Divines   382 

TUIKD  PAET,  888 — 404. 

1 —  This  opinion  is  neither  heretical  nor  allied  to  any  heresy   388 

2 —  Our  Opinion  is  directly  opposed  to  the  Pelagian  Heresy   397 

FOUETII  PART,  404 — 419. 

The  opposite  opinion  is  approved  by  none  of  the  ancient  Doctors  of  the  Church   404 

FIFTH  PART,  419 — 452. 

1—  The  opposite  opinion  isinjurioua  to  Grhce  and  hurtful  to  good  Morals   419 

2 —  Various  objections  in  favor  of  the  common  Interpretation  answered   428 

Jt— The  Conclusion   438 

A  LETTER  TO  HIPPOLYTUS  A  OOLLIBUS   453-478 

1— The  Divinity  of  the  Son  of  God   461 

a— The  Providence  of  God   46S 


CONTENTS.  vii 


Page. 

3 —  Divine  Predestination  »   470 

4 —  Grace  and  Free  Will   472 

5 —  Justification  ,     473 

CEETAIN  AETICLES  TO  BE  DILIGENTLY  EXAMINED  AND  WEIGHED.. 479— 511 

1 —  On  the  Scripture  and  Human  Traditions   479 

2 —  On  God,  considered  according  to  his  Nature.^   480 

3—  On  God,  considered  according  to  the  relation  betAveen  the  persons  in  the  Trinity,. .  481 

4—  On  the  Decree  of  God   482 

5 —  On  predestination  to  Salvation,  and  on  Damnation,  considered  in  the  highest  Degree  483 

6 —  On  the  Creation,  and  chiefly  that  of  Man   4-S5 

7 —  On  the  dominion  of  God  over  the  Creatures,  and  chiefly  over  Man   487 

8—  On  the  Providence  of  God   488 

9 —  On  Predestination  considered  in  the  primeval  state  of  Man   489 

10 —  On  the  cause  of  Sin  universally  , . . .  490 

1 1—  On  the  Fall  of  Adam   491 

12—  On  Original  Sin   492 

13 —  On  the  predestination  of  Man,  considered  partly  in  his  primeval  State,  and  partly  in 

the  Fall   492 

14 —  On  predestination  considered  after  the  Fall   493 

15 —  On  the  Decrees  of  God  which  concern  the  salvation  of  sinful  Men,  according  to  his 

own  Sense     494 

16—  On  Christ   495 

17 —  On  the  vocation  of  Sinners  to  communion  with  Christ,  and  to  a  participation  of  his 

benefits   496 

18—  On  Penitence ,   499 

19—  On  Faith   499 

20 —  On  Eegeneration  and  tlie  Eegenerate   501 

21 —  On  the  perseverance  of  Saints   502 

22 —  On  the  Assurance  of  Salvaticn   503 

23 —  On  the  Justification  of  Man  as  a  Sinner,  but  yet  a  believer  before  God   504 

24—  On  the  Good  Works  of  believers   506 

25—  On  Prayer   5u7 

26 —  On  the  Infants  of  believers  when  they  are  offered  for  Baptism   507 

27—  On  the  Supper  of  the  Lord   50T 

28—  On  Magistracy   508 

29—  On  the  Church  of  Eome   509 

A  LETTER  ON  TEE  SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST   611 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS 


OF 

JAMES  AEMIOTUS,  D.  D. 

ON  THE  PEINCIPAL  AETICLES  OF  THE  CHETSTIAN  KELIGION.  COMMENCED 
BY  THE  AUTHOR  CHIEFLY  FOE  THE  PUEPOSE  OF  FOEMING  A  SYSTEM  OF 
DIVINITY. 

These  Disputations,  prepared  by  Arminius  as  a  kind  of  Syllabus  to  his  Private 
Lectures,  are  incomplete.  In  the  preface  to  the  first  editio7i,  published  in  1610, 
it  is  said,  that  it  is  believed  that  upwards  of  twenty  Theses  are  wanting  to  crown 
the  undertaking.'^ 


DISPUTATIO]^  L 

ON  THEOLOGY. 

I.  As  WE  are  about  again  to  commence  our  course  of  theo- 
logical disputations  under  the  auspices  of  our  gracious  God, 
we  will  previously  treat  a  little  on  theology  itself. 

II.  By  the  word  "  theology"  we  do  not  understand  a  con- 
eeption  or  a  discourse  of  God  himself^  of  which  meaning  it 
would  properly  admit ;  but  we  understand  by  it,  "  a  concep- 
tion" or  a  discourse  about  God  and  things  divine,"  according 
to  its  common  use. 

III.  It  may  be  defined,  the  doctrine  or  science  of  the  truth 
which  is  according  to  godliness,  and  which  God  has  revealed 
to  man,  that  he  may  know  God  and  divine  things,  may  believe 
on  him  and  may  through  faith  perform  to  him  the  acts  of  love, 
fear,  honor,  worship  and  obedience,  and  may  in  return  expect 

2  VOL.  II. 


10 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


and  obtain  blessedness  from  him  tbrougb  union  with  him,  to 
the  divine  glory. 

lY.  The  proximate  and  immediate  object  of  this  doctrine 
or  science  is,  not  God  himself,  but  the  duty  and  act  of  man 
which  he  is  bound  to  perform  to  God.  In  theology,  therefore, 
God  himself  must  be  considered  as  the  object  of  this  duty. 

Y.  On  this  account,  theology  is  not  a  theoretical  science  or 
doctrine,  but  a  practical  one,  requiring  the  action  of  the  whole 
man,  according  to  all  and  each  of  its  parts — an  action  of  the 
most  transcendant  description,  answerable  to  the  excellence  of 
the  object  as  far  as  the  human  capacity  will  permit. 

YI.  From  these  premises,  it  follows  that  this  doctrine  is 
not  expressed  after  the  example  of  natural  science,  by  which 
God  knows  himself,  but  after  the  example  of  that  notion  which 
God  has  willingly  conceived  within  himself  from  all  eternity, 
about  the  prescribing  of  that  duty  and  of  all  things  required 
for  it. 


DISPUTATIOISr  II. 

ON  THE  MANNER  IN  WHICH  THEOLOGY  MUST  BE  TAUGHT. 

I.  It  has  long  been  a  maxim  with  those  philosophers  who 
are  the  masters  of  method  and  order,  that  the  theoretical  sci- 
ences ought  to  be  delivered  in  [compositivo]  a  synthetical 
order,  but  the  practical  in  an  analytical  order,  on  which 
account,  and  because  theology  is  a  practical  science,  it  follows 
that  it  must  be  treated  according  to  [resolutiva']  the  analytical 
method. 

II.  Our  discussion  of  this  doctrine  must  therefore  commence 
with  its  end,  about  which  we  must  previously  treat,  with  much 
brevity,  both  on  [^uod]  its  nature  or  what  it  is,  and  [^uid]  its 
'qualities ;  we  must  then  teach,  throughout  the  entire  discourse, 
the  means  for  attaining  the  end,  to  which  the  obtaining  of  the 
end  must  be  subjoined,  and,  at  this,  the  whole  discussion  must 
terminate. 

III.  For,  according  to  this  order,  not  only  the  whole  doctrine 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


11 


itself,  but  likewise  all  its  parts,  will  be  treated  from  its  princi- 
pal end,  and  each  article  will  obtain  that  place  which  belongs 
to  it  according  to  the  principal  relation  which  it  has  to  its  total 
and  to  the  end  of  the  whole. 

lY.  But  though  we  are  easily  satisfied  with  all  treatises  in 
which  the  body  of  divinity  is  explained,  provided  they  agree  . 
according  to  the  truth,  at  least  in  the  chief  and  fundamental  ^ 
things,  with  the  Scripture  itself;  and  though  we  willingly 
give  to  all  of  them  praise  and  commendation ;  yet,  if  on  ac- 
count only  of  inquiry  into  the  order,  and  for  the  sake  of  treat- 
ing the  subject  with  greater  accuracy,  we  may  be  allowed  to 
explain  what  [d.-sideremus]  are  our  views  and  wishes. 

Y.  In  the  first  place,  the  order  in  which  the  theology  ascribed 
to  God,  and  to  the  actions  of  God,  is  treated,  seems  to  be  in- 
convenient. N^either  are  we  pleased  with  the  division  of 
theology  into  the  pathological  diseases,  and  the  therapeutic 
after  a  preface  of  the  doctrine  about  the  principles,  the  end  and 
the  efficient ;  nor  with  that,  how  accommodating  soever  it 
may  be,  in  appearance,  in  which,  after  premising  as  its  princi- 
ples the  word  of  God,  and  God  himself,  as  the  causes  of  our 
salvation,  and  therefore  the  works  and  effects  of  God,  and  man 
who  is  its  subject  is  placed  as  a  part  of  it.  So  neither  do  we 
receive  satisfaction  from  the  partition  of  theological  science 
into  the  knowledge  of  God  and  of  man ;  nor  from  that  by  which 
theology  is  said  *to  exercise  itself  about  God  and  the  church ; 
nor  that  by  which  it  is  previously  determined  that  we  must 
treat  about  God,  the  motion  of  a  rational  creature  to  him,  and 
about  Christ ;  nor  does  that  which  prescribes  us  to  a  discourse 
about  God,  the  creatures,  and  principally  about  man  and  his 
fall,  about  his  reparation  through  Christ,  and  about  the  sacra- 
ments and  a  future  life. 


12 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


DISPUTATION  ni. 

ON  BLESSEDNESS,  THE  END  OF  THEOLOGY. 

I.  The  end  of  theology  is  the  blessedness  of  man  ;  and  that 
not  animal  or  natural,  but  spiritual  and  supernatural. 

II.  It  consists  in  fruition,  the  object  of  which  is  a  perfect, 
chief,  and  sufficient  good,  which  is  God. 

III.  The  foundation  of  this  fruition  is  life,  endowed  with 
understanding  and  with  intellectual  \_affectii\  feeling. 

lY.  The  connective  or  coherent  cause  of  fruition  is  union 
with  God,  by  which  that  life  is  so  greatly  perfected,  that  they 
who  obtain  this  union  are  said  to  be  "  partakers  of  the  divine 
nature  and  of  life  eternal." 

Y.  The  medium  of  fruition  is  understanding  and  [affectus] 
emotion  or  feeling — understandings  not  by  species  or  image, 
but  by  clear  vision,  which  is  called  that  of  face  to  face  ;  and 
feeling s  corresponding  with  this  vision. 

YL  The  cause  of  blessedness  is  God  himself,  uniting  him- 
self with  man  ;  that  is,  giving  himself  to  be  seen,  loved, 
possessed,  and  thus  to  be  enjoyed  by  man. 

YII.  The  antecedent  or  inly  moving  cause  is  the  goodness 
and  the  remunerative  justice  of  God,  which  have  the  wisdom 
of  God  as  their  precursor. 

YIII.  The  executive  cause  is  the  power  of  God,  by  which 
the  soul  is  enlarged  after  the  capacity  of  God,  and  the  animal 
body  is  transformed  and  transfigured  into  a  spiritual  body. 

IX.  The  end,  event,  or  consequence  is  two-fold,  (1,)  a 
demonstration  of  the  glorious  wisdom,  goodness,  justice, 
power,  and  likewise  the  universal  perfection  of  God;  and  (2,) 
his  glorification  by  the  beatified. 

X.  Its  adjunct  properties  are,  that  it  is  eternal,  and  is  known 
to  be  so  by  him  who  possesses  it ;  and  that  it  at  once  both 
satisfies  every  desiie,  and  is  an  object  of  continued  desire. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


13 


DISPUTATIO]^  lY. 

ON  RELIGION. 

I.  Omitting  all  dispute  about  the  question,  "  whether  it  be 
possible  for  God  to  render  man  happy  by  a  union  with  him- 
self without  the  intervening  act  of  man,"  we  affirm  that  it  has 
pleased  God  not  to  bless  man  except  by  some  duty  performed 
according  to  the  will  of  God,  which  God  has  determined  to 
reward  with  eternal  blessedness. 

II.  And  this  most  equitable  will  of  God  rests  on  the  foun- 
dation of  the  justice  and  equity  according  to  which  it  seems 
[fas]  lawful  and  proper,  that  the  Creator  should  require  from 
his  creature,  endowed  with  reason,  an  act  tending  to  God,  by 
which,  in  return,  a  rational  creature  is  bound  to  tend  towards 
God,  its  author  and  beneficent  lord  and  master. 

III.  This  act  must  be  one  of  the  entire  man,  according  to 
each  of  his  parts — according  to  his  soul,  and  that  entirely,  and 
each  of  his  faculties,  and  according  to  his  body,  so  far  as  it  is 
the  mute  instrument  of  the  soul,  yet  itself  possessing  a  capacity 
for  happiness  by  means  of  the  soul.  This  act  must  likewise 
be  the  most  excellent  of  all  those  things  which  can  proceed 
from  man,  and  like  a  continuous  act ;  so  that  whatever  other 
acts  those  may  be  which  are  performed  by  man  through  some 
intervention  of  the  will,  they  ought  to  be  performed  according 
to  this  act  and  its  rule. 

TV.  Though  this  duty,  according  to  its  entire  essence  and 
all  its  parts,  can  scarcely  be  designated  by  one  name,  yet  we 
do  not  improperly  denominate  it  when  we  give  it  the  name  of 
religion.  This  word,  in  its  most  enlarged  acceptation,  em- 
braces three  things^ — the  act  itself,  the  obligation  of  the  act, 
and  the  obligation  with  regard  to  God,  on  account  of  whom 
that  act  must  be  performed.  Thus,  we  are  bound  to  honor  our 
parents  on  account  of  God. 

Y.  Religion,  then,  is  that  act  which  our  theology  places  in 
order ;  and  it  is  for  this  reason  justly  called  "  the  object  of 
theological  doctrine." 


t 


14r  JAMES  AEMDOUS. 

YI.  Its  method  is  defined  bj  tlie  command  of  God,  and  not 
hj  human  choice ;  for  the  word  of  God  is  its  rule  and  meas- 
ure. Aod  as  in  these  days  we  have  this  word  in  the  Scrip- 
tures of  the  Old  and  Xew  Testament  alone,  we  say  that  these 
Scriptures  are  the  canon  according  to  which  religion  is  to  be 
conformed.  We  shall  soon  treat  more  fully  about  the  Scrip- 
tures how  far  it  is  requu*ed  that  we  should  consider  them  as 
the  canon  of  religion. 

YII.  The  opposites  to  religion  are,  impiety,  that  is,  the 
neglect  and  contempt  of  God,  and  sSs\oSpri(fxsia^  will-worship, 
or  superstition,  that  is,  a  mode  of  religion  invented  by  man. 
Hypocrisy  is  not  opposed  to  the  whole  of  religion,  but  to  its 
integrity  or  purity ;  because  that  in  which  the  entire  man 
ought  to  be  engaged,  is  performed  only  by  his  body. 


DISPUTATION  Y. 

ON  THE  EULE  OF  EELTGION,  THE  WORD  OF  GOD,  AXD  THE 
SCEIPTITKES  IN  PAETICULAE. 

I.  As  EELTGiox  is  the  duty  of  man  towards  God,  it  is  neces- 
sary that  it  should  be  so  prescribed  by  God  in  his  sure  word 
as  to  render  it  evident  to  man  that  he  is  bound  by  this  pre- 
script as  it  proceeds  from  God ;  or,  at  least,  it  may  and  ought 
to  be  evident  to  man. 

II.  This  word  is  either  svoia^s-rov  [an  inward  or  mental  rea- 
soning,] or  t^po^fopisov,  [a  spoken  or  delivered  discourse]  the  for- 
mer of  them  being  ingrafted  in  the  mind  of  man  b}'  an  internal 
inscription,  whether  it  be  an  increation  or  a  superinfusion ; 
the  latter  being  openly  pronounced. 

in.  By  the  ingrafted  word,  God  has  prescribed  religion  to 
man,  first  by  inwardly  persuading  him  that  God  ought,  and 
that  it  was  his  will,  to  be  worshiped  by  man  ;  then,  by  uni- 
vereally  disclosing  to  the  mind  of  man  the  worship  that  is 
pleasing  to  himself,  and  that  consists  of  the  love  of  God  and 
of  one's  neighbor :  and,  lastly,  by  writing  or  sealing  a  remu- 


PEIVATE  DISPTJTATIONS. 


15 


Deration  on  his  heart.  This  inward  manifestation  is  the  foun- 
dation of  all  external  revelation. 

lY.  God  has  employed  the  outward  word,  fikst,  that  he 
might  repeat  what  had  been  ingrafted — might  recall  it  to  re- 
membrance, and  might  urge  its  exercise.  Secondly,  that  he 
might  prescribe  to  him  other  things  besides,  which  seem  to  be 
placed  in  a  four-fold  difference.  (1.)  For  they  are  either  such 
things  as  are  homogeneous  to  the  law  of  nature,  which  might 
easily  be  raised  up  on  the  things  ingrafted,  or  which  man 
could  not  with  equal  ease  deduce  from  them.  (2.)  Or  they 
may  appear  to  be  such  things  as  these,  yet  such  as  it  has 
pleased  God  to  circumscribe,  lest,  from  the  things  ingrafted, 
conclusions  should  be  drawn  that  were  universally,  or  at  least 
for  that  time,  repugnant  to  the  will  of  God.  (3.)  Or  they  are 
merely  positive,  having  no  communion  with  these  ingrafted 
things,  although  they  rest  on  the  general  [dehito]  duty  of 
religion.  (4.)  Or,  lastly,  according,  to  some  state  of  man,  they 
are  suitable  to  him,  particularly  for  that  into  which  man  was 
brought  by  the  fall  from  his  primeval  condition. 

Y.  God  communicates  this  external  word  to  man,  either 
orally,  or  by  writing.  For,  neither  with  respect  to  the  whole 
of  religion,  nor  with  respect  to  its  parts,  is  God  confined  to 
either  of  these  modes  of  communication ;  but  he  sometimes 
uses  one  and  sometimes  another,  and  at  other  times  both  of 
them,  according  to  his  own  choice  and  pleasure.  He  first 
employed  oral  enunciation  in  its  delivery,  and  afterwards, 
writing^  as  a  more  certain  means  against  corruption  and 
oblivion.  He  has  also  completed  it  in  writing  /  so  that  we 
now  have  the  infallible  word  of  God  in  no  other  place  than  in 
the  Scriptures,  which  are  therefore  appropriately  denominated 
"  the  instrument  of  religion." 

YI.  These  Scriptures  are  contained  in  those  books  of  the 
Old  and  the  E^ew  Testament  which  are  called  "  canonical 
They  consist  of  the  five  books  of  Moses  ;  the  books  of  Joshua, 
Judges,  and  of  Euth ;  the  First  and  Second  of  Samuel ;  the 
First  and  Second  of  Kings  ;  the  First  and  Second  of  Chroni- 
cles; the  books  of  Ezra  and  of  N'ehemiah,  and  the  first 
ten  chapters  of  that  of  Esther;  fifteen  books  of  the  proph- 


16 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


ets,  that  is,  the  three  Major  and  the  twelve  Minor  Prophets  ; 
the  books  of  J ob,  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  the  Can- 
ticles, Daniel,  and  of  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah  :  All 
these  books  are  contained  in  the  Old  Testa njent.  Those  of 
the  ISTew  Testament  are  the  following  :  The  four  Evangelists; 
one  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ;  thirteen  of  St.  Paul's 
Epistles ;  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  ;  that  of  St.  James ;  the 
two  of  St.  Peter ;  the  three  of  St.  John  ;  that  of  St.  Jude ;  and 
the  Apocalypse  by  St.  John.  Some  of  these  are  without  hesi- 
tation accounted  authentic ;  but  about  others  of  them  doubts 
have  been  occasionally  entertained.  Yet  the  number  is  quite 
sufficient  of  those  about  which  no  doubts  were  ever  indulged. 

YII.  The  primary  cause  of  these  books  is  God,  in  his  Son, 
through  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  instrumental  causes  are  holy 
men  of  God,  who,  not  at  their  own  will  and  pleasure,  but  as 
they  were  actuated  and  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  wrote 
*these  books,  whether  the  words  were  inspired  into  them,  dic- 
tated to  them,  or  administered  by  them  under  the  divine 
direction. 

Yin.  The  matter  or  object  of  the  Scriptures  is  religion,  as 
has  already  been  mentioned.  The  essential  and  internal  form 
is  the  true  intimation  or  signification  of  the  will  of  God  respect- 
ing religion.  The  external  is  the  form  or  character  of  the 
word,  which  is  attempered  to  the  dignity  of  the  speaker,  and 
accommodated  to  the  nature  of  things  and  to  the  capacity  of 
men. 

IX.  The  end  is  the  instruction  of  man,  to  his  own  salvation 
and  the  glory  of  God.  The  parts  of  the  whole  instruction  are 
doctrine,  reproof,  institution  or  instruction,  correction,  conso- 
lation, and  threatening. 


DISPUTATIOIT  YL 

ON  THE  AUTHORITY  AND  CEKTAINTY  OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES. 

I.  The  authority  of  the  word  of  God,  which  is  comprised  in 
the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  lies  both  in  the 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


17 


veracity  of  the  whole  narration,  and  of  all  the  declarations, 
whether  they  be  those  about  things  past,  about  things  present, 
or  about  those  which  are  to  come,  and  in  the  power  of  the 
commands  and  prohibitions,  which  are  contained  in  the  divine 
word. 

II.  Both  of  these  kinds  of  authority  can  depend  on  no  other 
than  on  God,  who  is  the  principal  author  of  this  word,  both 
because  he  is  truth  without  suspicion  of  falsehood,  and  because 
he  is  of  power  invincible. 

III.  On  this  account,  the  knowledge  alone  that  this  word 
is  divine,  is  obligatory  on  our  belief  and  obedience ;  and  so 
strongly  is  it  binding,  that  this  obligation  can  be  augmented 
by  no  external  authority. 

lY.  In  what  manner  or  respect  soever  the  church  may  be 
contemplated,  she  can  do  nothing  to  confirm  this  authority ; 
for  she,  also,  is  indebted  to  this  word  for  all  her  own  authority ; 
and  she  is  not  a  church  unless  she  have  previonsly  exercised 
faith  in  this  word  as  being  divine,  and  have  engaged  to  obey 
it.  Wherefore,  in  any  way  to  suspend  the  authority  of  the 
Scriptures  on  the  church,  is  to  deny  that  God  is  of  sufficient 
veracity  and  supreme  power,  and  that  the  church  herself  is  a 
church. 

Y.  But  it  is  proved  by  various  methods,  that  this  word  has 
a  divine  origin,  either  by  signs  employed  for  the  enunciation 
or  declartion  of  the  word,  such  as  miracles,  predictions  and 
divine  [apparitiones]  appearances — by  arguments  ingrafted 
on  the  word  itself,  such  as  the  matters  which  it  contains,  the 
style  and  character  of  the  discourse,  the  agreements  between 
all  the  parts  and  each  of  them,  and  the  efficacy  of  the  word 
itself;  and  by  the  inward  testification  or  witness  of  God  him- 
self by  his  Holy  Spirit.  To  all  these,  we  add  a  secondary 
proof — the  testimony  of  those  persons  who  have  received  this 
word  as  divine. 

YI.  The  force  and  efficacy  of  this  last  testimony  is  entirely 
human,  and  [tantimomenli  quanta']  is  of  importance  equal  to  the 
quantum  of  wisdom,  probity  and  constancy  possessed  by  the 
witnesses.    And  on  this  account  the  authority  of  the  church 


18 


JAMES  AKMINirS. 


can  make  no  other  kind  of  faith  than  that  which  is  human, 
but  which  may  be  preparatory  to  the  production  of  faith  di- 
vine. The  testimony  of  the  church,  therefore,  is  not  the  only 
thing  by  which  the  certainty  of  the  Scriptures  is  confirmed  to 
us  ;  indeed  it  is  not  the  principle  thiog ;  nay,  it  is  the  weakest 
of  all  those  which  are  adduced  in  confirmation. 

YII.  'No  arguments  can  be  invented  for  establishing  the 
divinity  of  any  word,  which  do  not  belong  by  most  equitable 
reason  to  this  word  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  impossible 
any  arguments  can  be  devised  which  may  conduce  even  by  a 
probable  reason  to  destroy  the  divinity  of  this  word. 

YIII.  Though  it  be  not  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation  to 
believe  that  this  or  that  book  is  the  work  of  the  author  whose 
title  it  bears  ;  yet  this  fact  may  be  established  by  surer  argu- 
ments than  are  those  which  claim  the  authorship  of  any  other 
work  for  the  writer. 

IX.  The  Scriptures  are  canonical  in  the  same  way  as  they 
are  divine  ;  because  they  contain  the  rule  of  faith,  charity, 
hope,  and  of  all  our  inward  and  outward  actions.  They  do 
not,  therefore,  require  human  authority  in  order  to  their  being 
received  into  the  canon,  or  considered  as  canonical.  Nay,  the 
relation  between  God  and  his  creatures,  requires  that  his  word 
should  be  the  rule  of  life  to  his  creatures. 

X.  We  assert  that,  for  the  establishment  of  the  divinity  of 
the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  this  disjunct- 
live  proposition  is  of  irrefutable  validity  :  Either  the  Scrip- 
tures are  divine,  or  (far  be  blasphemy  from  the  expression !) 
they  are  the  most  foolish  of  all  writings,  whether  they  be 
said  to  have  proceeded  from  man,  or  from  the  evil  spirit. 

COEOLLARIES. 

1.  To  afiirm  "that  the  authority  of  the  Scriptures  depends 
upon  the  church,  because  the  church  is  more  ancient  than  the 
Scriptures,"  is  a  falsehood,  a  foolish  speech,  an  implication 
of  manifold  contradictions  and  blasphemy. 

2.  The  authority  of  the  Eoman  pontiff  to  bear  witness  to 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


19 


the  divinity  of  the  Scriptures,  is  less  than  that  of  any  bishop 
who  is  wiser  and  better  than  he,  and  possessed  of  greater 
constancy. 


DISPUTATION  YII. 

^.  ON  THE  PERFECTION  OF  THE  SCKIPTUEES. 

I.  We  denominate  [Gomprwhensionem']  that  which  compre- 
hends all  things  necessary  for  the  church  to  know,  to  believe, 
to  do  and  to  hope,  in  order  to  salvation,  "  the  perfection  of 
the  sacred  Scriptures." 

II.  As  we  are  about  to  engage  in  the  defence  of  this  per- 
fection, against  inspirations,  visions,  dreams  and  other  novel 
enthusiastic  things,  we  assert,  that,  since  the  time  when  Christ 
and  his  apostles  sojourned  on  earth,  no  inspiration  of  any 
thing  necessary  for  the  salvation  of  any  individual  man,  or  of 
the  church,  has  been  given  to  any  single  person  or  to  any  con- 
gregation of  men  whatsoever,  which  thing  is  not  in  a  full  and 
most  perfect  manner  comprised  in  the  sacred  Scriptures. 

III.  We  likewise  affirm,  that  in  the  latter  ages  no  doctrine 
necessary  to  salvation  has  been  deduced  from  these  Scriptures 
which  was  not  explicitly  known  and  believed  from  the  very 
commencement  of  the  christian  church.  For,  from  the  time 
of  Christ's  ascent  into  heaven,  the  church  of  God  was  in  an 
adult  state,  being  capable  indeed  of  increasing  in  the  knowl- 
edge and  belief  of  things  necessary  to  salvation,  but  not  capa- 
ble of  receiving  accessions  of  new  articles  ;  that  is,  she  was  ca- 
pable of  increase  in  that  faith  by  which  the  articles  of  religion 
are  believed,  but  not  in  that  faith  which  [oreditur']  is  the  sub- 
ject of  belief. 

lY.  Whatever  additions  have  since  been  made,  they  ob- 
tain only  the  rank  of  interpretations  and  proofs,  which  ought 
themselves  not  to  be  at  variance  with  the  Scriptures,  but  to 
be  deduced  from  them  ;  otherwise,  no  authority  is  due  to  them, 
but  they  should  rather  be  considered  as  allied  to  error ;  for  the 
perfection,  not  only  of  the  propositions,  but  likewise  of  the  ex- 


20 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


planations  and  proofs  which  are  comprised  in  the  Scriptures, 
is  very  great. 

Y.  But  the  most  compendious  way  of  forming  a  judgment 
about  any  enunciation  or  proposition,  is,  to  discern  whether 
its  subject  and  predicate  be  either  expressly  or  with  equal  force 
contained  in  them,  that  proposition  may  be  rejected  at  least 
as  not  necessary  to  salvation,  without  any  detriment  to  one's 
salvation.  But  the  predicate  may  be  of  such  a  kind,  that, 
when  ascribed  to  this  subject,  it  cannot  be  received  without 
detriment  to  the  salvation.  For  instance,  "The  Roman  pon- 
tiff is  the  head  of  the  church."  "The  virgin  Mary  is  the  me- 
diatrix of  grace." 

DISPUTATION  YIII. 

ON  THE  PERSPICUITY  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

I.  The  perspicuity  of  the  Scriptures  is  a  quality  agreeing 
with  them  as  with  a  sign,  according  to  which  quality  they  are 
adapted  clearly  to  reveal  the  conceptions,  whose  signs  are  the 
words  comprised  in  the  Scriptures,  to  those  persons  to  whom 
the  Scriptures  are  administered  according  to  the  benevolent 
providence  of  God. 

II.  That  perspicuity  is  a  quality  which  agrees  with  the 
Scriptures,  is  proved  from  its  cause  and  its  end.  (1.)  In  the 
cause^  we  consider  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  the  author, 
who,  according  to  his  wisdom  knew,  and  according  to  his 
goodness  willed,  clearly  and  well  to  enunciate  or  declare  the 
meanings  of  his  own  mind.  (2.)  In  the  end  is  \necessitas\ 
the  duty  of  those  to  whom  the  Scriptures  are  directed,  and 
who,  through  the  decree  of  God,  cannot  attain  to  salvation 
without  this  knowledge. 

III.  This  perspicuity  comes  distinctly  to  be  considered  both 
with  regard  to  its  object  and  its  subject.  For  all  things  [in 
the  Scriptures]  are  not  equally  perspicuous,  nor  is  every  thing 
alike  perspicuous  to  all  persons  ;  but  in  the  epistle  of  St.  Paul, 
some  things  occur  which  "are  hard  to  be  understood  ;"  and 
"  the  gospel  is  hid,  or  concealed,  to  them  who  are  lost,  in  whom 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


21 


the  god  of  this  world  hath  blinded  the  minds  of  them  who  be- 
lieve not." 

lY.  But  those  senses  or  meanings,  the  knowledge  and  belief 
of  which  are  simplj  necessary  to  salvation,  are  revealed  in  the 
Scriptures  with  such  plainness,  that  they  can  be  perceived 
even  by  the  most  simple  of  mankind,  provided  \_usu  polleant] 
they  be  able  duly  to  exercise  their  reason. 

Y.  But  they  are  perspicuous  to  those  alone  who,  being  illu- 
minated by  the  light  o^  the  Holy  Spirit,  have  eyes  to  see,  and 
a  mind  to  understand  and  discern.  For  any  color  whatever, 
tho  gh  sufficiently  illuminated  by  the  light,  is  not  seen  except 
by  the  eye  which  is  endued  with  the  power  of  seeing,  as  with 
an  inward  light. 

YI.  But  even  in  those  things  which  are  necessary  to  be 
known  and  believed  in  order  to  salvation,  the  law  must  be  dis- 
tinguished from  the  gospel,  especially  in  that  part  which  re- 
lates to  Jesus  Christ  crucified  and  raised  up  again.  For  even 
the  gentiles,  who  are  aliens  from  Christ,  have  ^'  the  work  of 
the  law  written  in  their  hearts,"  though  this  is  not  saving,  ex- 
cept by  the  addition  of  the  internal  illumination  and  inspira- 
tion of  God  ;  but  [semio]  "  the  doctrine  of  the  cross,  which  is 
foolishness  and  a  stumbling  block  to  [animali]  the  natural 
man,"  is  not  perceived  without  the  revelation  of  the  Spirit. 

YII.  In  the  Scriptures,  some  things  may  be  found  so  diffi- 
cult to  be  understood,  that  men  of  the  quickest  and  most  per- 
spicacious genius  may,  in  attaining  to  an  understanding  of 
those  things,  have  a  subject  on  which  to  bestow  their  labors 
during  the  whole  course  of  their  lives.  But  God  has  so  finely 
attempered  the  Scripture,  that  they  can  neither  be  read  with- 
out profit,  nor,  after  having  been  perused  and  reperused  innu- 
merable times,  can  they  be  put  aside  through  aversion  or 
disgust. 


22 


JAMES  AKMINITIS. 


DISPUTATION  IX. 

ON  THE  MEANINGS  AND  INTERPRETATION  OF  THE  HOLY 
SCRIPTURES. 

I.  The  legitimate  and  genuine  sense  of  the  holy  Scriptures 
is,  that  which  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  autl^r  of  them,  intended, 
and  which  is  collected  from  the  words  themselves,  whether 
they  be  receiv^ed  in  their  proper  or  in  their  figurative  signifi- 
cation ;  that  is,  it  is  the  grammatical  sense,  as  it  is  called. 

II.  From  this  sense,  alone,  efficacious  arguments  may  be 
sought  for  the  proof  of  doctrines. 

III.  But,  on  account  of  the  analogical  similitude  of  corpo- 
real, carnal,  [cinimalium']  natural,  and  earthly  things,  and 
those  belonging  to  the  present  life,  to  things  spiritual,  heav- 
enly, future  and  eternal,  it  happens  that  a  double  meaning, 
each  of  them  certain  and  intended  by  the  author,  lies  under 
the  very  same  words  in  the  Scriptures,  of  which  the  one  is 
called  "  the  typical,"  the  other  "  the  mea  ing  prefigured  in 
the  type"  or  "  the  allegorical."  To  this  allegorical  meaning,  we 
also  refer  the  analogical,  as  [collatum]  opposed  in  a  similar 
manner  to  that  which  is  typical. 

IV.  From  these  meanings,  that  which  is  called  "  the  aethio- 
logical"  and  "  the  tropological"  do  not  difier,  since  the  former 
of  them  renders  the  cause  of  the  grammatical  sense,  and  the 
latter  contains  an  accommodation  of  it  to  the  circumstances  of 
persons,  place,  time,  &c. 

Y.  The  interpretation  of  Scripture  has  respect  both  to  its 
words  and  to  its  sense  or  meaning. 

YI.  1.  The  interpretation  of  its  words  is  either  that  of  single 
words,  or  of  many  words  combined  ;  and  both  of  these  meth- 
ods constitute  either  a  translation  of  the  words  into  another 
language,  or  an  explanation  [or  paraphrase]  through  other 
words  of  the  same  language. 

YII.  Let  translation  be  so  restricted,  that,  if  the  original 
word  has  any  ambiguity,  the  word  into  which  it  is  translated 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


23 


may  retain  it :  or,  if  that  cannot  be  done,  [compensefur]  let  it 
have  something  equivalent  by  being  noted  in  the  margin. 

YIII.  In  the  explanation  [or  paraphrase]  which  shall  be 
made  by  other  v^ords,  endeavors  must  be  used  that  explanato- 
ry words  be  sought  from  the  Scriptures  themselves.  For  this 
purpose,  [ohservatio]  attention  to  the  synonymy  and  phraseol- 
ogy will  be  exceedingly  useful. 

IX.  2.  In  the  interpretation  of  the  meanings  of  the  words, 
it  must  be  sedulously  attempted  both  to  make  the  sense  agree 
with  the.  rule  or  "  form  of  sound  words,"  and  to  accommodate 
it  to  the  scope  or  intention  of  the  author  in  that  passage.  To 
this  end,  in  addition  to  a  clear  conception  of  the  words,  a  com- 
parison of  other  passages  of  Scripture,  whether  they  be  simi- 
lar, is  conducive,  as  is  likew^ise  a  diligent  seai^ch  or  institution 
into  its  context.  In  this  labor,  the  occasion  [of  the  words]  and 
their  end,  the  connection  of  those  things  which  precede  and 
which  follow,  and  the  circumstances,  also,  of  persons,  times 
and  places,  will  be  principally  observed. 

X.  As  "  the  Scriptures  are  not  of  private  or  peculiar  ex- 
planation," an  interpreter  of  them,  w^ill  strive  to  "  have  his 
senses  exercised"  in  them  ;  that  the  interpretation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, which,  in  those  sacred  writings,  comes  under  the  denom- 
ination of  "  prophecy,"  may  proceed  from  the  same  Spirit  as 
that  which  primarily  inspired  the  prophecy  of  the  Scriptures. 

XI.  But  the  authority  of  no  one  is  so  great,  whether  it  be 
that  of  an  individual  or  of  a  church,  as  to  be  able  to  obtrude 
his  own  interpretation  on  the  people  as  the  authentic  one. 
From  this  affirmation  however,  byway  of  eminence,  we  except 
the  prophets  and  the  apostles.  For  such  interpretation  is  al- 
ways subjected  to  the  judgment  of  him  to  whom  it  is  proposed, 
to  this  extent — that  he  is  bound  to  receive  it,  only  so  far  as  it 
is  confirmed  by  strength  of  arguments. 

XII.  For  this  reason,  neither  the  agreement  of  the  fathers, 
which  can,  with  difficulty,  be  demonstrated,  nor  the  authority 
of  the  Roman  pontiff,  ought  to  be  received  as  the  rule  of  in- 
terpretation. 

'XIII.  We  do  not  wish  to  introduce  unbounded  license,  by 
which  it  may  be  allowable  to  any  person,  whether  [prophetce} 


24  JAMES  AKMINIUS. 

a  public  interpreter  of  Scripture  or  a  private  individual,  to  re- 
ject, without  cause,  any  interpretations  whatsoever,  whether 
made  bj  one  prophet,  or  by  more  ;  but  we  desire  the  liberty 
of  prophesying  [or  public  expounding]  to  be  preserved  entire 
and  unimpaired  in  the  church.  This  liberty,  itself,  however, 
we  subject  to  the  judgment  of  God,  as  possessing  the  power 
of  life  and  death,  and  to  that  of  the  church,  or  of  her  prelates 
who  are  endowed  with  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing. 


DISPUTATIOIS^  X. 

ON  THE  EFFICACY  OF  THE  SCKIPTURES. 

I.  When  we  treat  on  the  force  and  efficacy  of  the  word  of 
God,  w^hether  spoken  or  written,  we  always  append  to  it  the 
principal  and  concurrent  efficacy  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

II.  The  object  of  this  efficacy  is  man,  but  he  must  be  con- 
sidered either  as  the  subject  in  whom  the  effi(;acy  operates,  or 
as  the  object  about  whom  this  efficacy  exercises  itself. 

III.  1.  The  subject  of  this  efficacy  in  whom  it  operates,  is 
man  according  to  his  understanding  and  his  [  affectmrb]  pas- 
sions, and  as  being  endowed  with  a  capacity,  eitijer  active  or 
passive,  (i.)  According  to  his  understanding^  by  which  he  is 
able  to  understand  the  meanings  of  the  word,  and  to  appre- 
hend them  as  true  and  good  for  himself  (ii.)  According  to 
his  passions^  by  w^hich  he  is  capable  of  being  carried  by  his 
appetites  to  something  true  and  good  which  is  pointed  out,  to 
embrace  it,  and  [acquiescere]  to  repose  in  it. 

lY.  This  efficacy  is  not  only  preparatory,  by  which  the  un- 
derstanding and  the  passions  are  prepared  to  apprehend  some- 
thing else  that  is  yet  more  true  and  good,  and  that  is  not  com- 
prised in  the  external  word  ;  but  it  is  likewise  [consummatorid] 
perfective,  by  which  the  human  understanding  and  affections 
are  so  perfected,  that  man  cannot  attain  to  an  ulterior  perfec- 
tion in  the  present  life.  Therefore,  we  reject  [t  ie  doctrine  of] 
those  who  affirm  that  the  Scriptures  are  a  dead  letter,  and 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


25 


serve  only  to  prepare  a  man,  and  to  render  him  capable  of  re- 
ceiving another  inward  word. 

Y.  This  efficacy  is  beautifully  circumscribed  in  the  Scrip- 
tures by  three  acts,  each  of  which  is  two-fold.  (1.)  That  of 
teaching  what  is  true,  and  of  confuting  what  is  false.  (2.) 
That  of  exhorting  to  what  is  good,  dissuading  from  what  is 
evil,  and  of  reproving  if  any  thing  has  been  done  beyond  or 
contrary  to  one's  duty.  (3.)  That  of  administering  consolation 
to  a  contrite  spirit,  and  of  denouncing  threats  against  a  lofty 
spirit. 

YI.  2.  The  object  of  this  efficacy,  about  v/hich  it  exercises 
itself,  is  the  same  man,  placed  befor3  the  tribunal  of  divine 
justice,  that,  according  to  this  word,  he  [repoi'tet]  may  bear 
away  from  it  a  sentence  either  of  justification  or  of  condem- 
nation. 


DISPUTATION  XI. 

ON  RELIGION  IN  A  STRICTER  SENSE. 

We  have  treated  on  religion  generally,  and  on  its  principles  as  they  are  com- 
prehended in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament.  We  must  noiff 
treat  upon  it  in  a  stricter  signification. 

I.  As  RELIGION  contains  the  duty  of  man  towards  God,  it 
must  necessarily  be  founded  in  the  mutual  relation  which  sub- 
sists between  God  and  man.  If  it  happen  that  this  relation  is 
varied,  the  mode  of  religion  must  also  be  varied,  the  acts  per- 
taining to  the  substance  of  every  religion  always  remaining, 
which  are  knowledge,  faith,  love,  fear,  trust,  dread  and  obedience. 

II.  ^  The  first  relation  between  God  and  man  is  that  which 
flows  from  the  creation  of  man  in  the  divine  image,  according 
to  which  religion  was  prescribed  to  him  by  the  comprehensive 
law  that  has  been  impressed  on  the  minds  of  men,  and  that 
was  afterwards  repeated  by  Moses  in  the  ten  commandments. 
For  the  sake  of  proving  man's  obedience,  God  added  to  this 
a  symbolical  law,  about  not  eating  the  fruit  of  the  tree  of  the 
knowledge  of  good  and  eviL 

3  TOL.  II. 


26 


JAMES  AEMrNTUS. 


III.  Through  the  sin  of  man,  another  relation  was  introdu- 
ced between  him  and  God,  according  to  which,  man,  being 
liable  to  the  condemnation  of  God,  needs  the  grace  of  resto- 
ration. If  God  bestow  this  grace  on  man,  the  religion  which 
is  to  be  prescribed  to  man  must  now  be  also  founded  on  that 
act,  in  addition  to  creation.  Since  this  act  [on  the  part  of 
God]  requires  from  man  an  acknowledgement  of  sin  and 
thanksgiving  for  deliverance,  it  is  apparent  that,  [hie]  in  this 
new  relation,  the  mode  of  religion  ought  likewise  to  be  varied, 
as,  through  the  appointment  of  God,  it  has  in  reality  been 
varied. 

lY.  It  was  the  pleasure  of  God  so  to  administer  this  varia- 
tion, that  it  should  not  immediately  exhibit  this  grace  in  a 
complete  manner,  but  that  it  should  retain  man  for  a  season 
under  [obsignatione]  the  sealed  dominion  of  guilt,  yet  with  the 
addition  of  a  promise  of  grace  to  be  exhibited  in  his  own 
time.  Hence,  arises  the  difference  of  the  religion  which  was 
prescribed  by  Moses  to  the  children  of  Israel,  and  that  which 
was  delivered  by  Christ  to  his  followers — of  which  the  for- 
mer is  called  "  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament  and  of  the 
promise,"  and  the  latter,  "  that  of  the  l^ew  Testament  and  of 
the  gospel ;"  the  former  is  also  called  the  Jewish  religion ; 
the  latter,  the  Christian. 

Y.  The  use  of  the  ceremonial  law  under  Moses,  and  its  ab- 
rogation under  Christ,  teach  most  clearly  that  this  religion  or 
mode  of  religion  differs  in  many  acts.  But  as  the  Christian 
religion  prevails  at  this  time,  and  as  [its  obligations  are]  to  be 
performed  by  us,  we  will  treat  further  about  it,  yet  so  as  to 
intersperse,  in  their  proper  places,  some  mention,  both  of  the 
primitive  religion  and  of  that  of  the  Jews,  so  far  as  they 
are  capable,  and  ought  to  serve  to  explain  the  Christian  religion. 

YI.  But  it  is  not  our  wish  for  this  dilOference  to  be  extended 
BO  far  as  to  have  the  attainment  of  salvation,  without  the  in- 
tervention of  Christ,  ascribed  to  those  who  served  God  under 
the  paedagogy  of  the  Old  Testament  and  by  faith  in  the  prom- 
ise ;  for  the  subjoined  affirmation  has  always  obtained  from 
hd  time  when  the  first  promise  was  promulgated  :  "  There  is 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


2T 


none  other  name  nnder  heaven,  given  among  men,  than  that 
of  onr  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  which  men  must  be  saved." 

YII.  It  appears,  from  this,  that  the  following  assertion, 
which  was  used  by  one  of  the  ancients,  is  false  and  untheolo- 
gical :  "  Men  were  saved  at  first  by  the  law  of  nature,  after- 
wards, by  that  of  Moses,  and  at  length,  by  that  of  grace." 
This,  also,  is  farther  apparent,  that  such  a  confusion  of  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  religions  as  was  introduced  by  Mahom-  . 
et,  is  completely  opposed  to  the  dispensation  or  economy  of 
God. 


DISPUTATIOISi  XIL 

ON  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION,  IIS  NAME  AND  RELATION. 

I.  Beginning  now  to  treat  further  on  the  Christian  religion, 
we  will  first  declare  what  is  the  meaning  of  this  term,  and  we 
will  afterwards  consider  the  matter  of  this  religion,  each  in  its 
order. 

II.  The  Christian  religion,  which  the  Jews  called  "  the  her- 
esy of  the  I^azarenes,"  obtained  its  name  from  Jesus  of  l^aza- 
reth,  whom  God  hath  appointed  as  our  only  master,  and  hath 
made  him  both  Christ  and  Lord. 

III.  But  this  name  agrees  with  him  in  two  ways — ^from  the 
cause  and  from  the  object.  (1.)  From  the  cause ;  because 
Jesus  Christ,  as  "  the  Teacher  sent  from  God,"  prescribed  this 
religion,  both  by  his  own  voice,  when  he  dwelt  on  earth,  and 
by  his  apostles,  whom  he  sent  forth  into  all  the  world.  (2.) 
From  the  object ;  because  the  same  Jesus  Christ,  the  object 
of  this  religion,  according  to  godliness,  is  now  exhibited,  and 
fully  or  perfectly  manifested  ;  whereas,  he  was  formerly  prom- 
ised and  foretold  by  Moses  and  the  prophets,  only  as  being 
about  to  come. 

lY.  He  was,  indeed,  a  teacher  far  transcending  all  othe 
teachers — Moses,  the  'prophets,  and  even  the  angels  them- 


28 


JAMES  AKMINrUS. 


selves — both  in  the  mode  of  his  perception,  and  in  the  excel- 
lence of  his  doctrine.  1.  In  the  mode  of  his  perception  /  be- 
cause, existing  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  admitted  intimately 
to  behold  all  the  secrets  of  the  Father,  and  endued  with  the 
plenitude  of  the  Spirit,  he  saw  and  heard  those  things  which 
he  speaks  and  testifies.  But  other  teachers,  being  endued, 
according  to  a  certain  Imoduni]  measure  with  the  Spirit,  have 
perceived  either  by  a  vision,  by  dreams,  by  conversing  "face 
to  face,"  or  by  the  intervention  of  an  angel,  those  things  which 
it  was  their  duty  to  declare  to  others  ;  and  this  Spirit  itself  is 
called  "  the  Spirit  of  Christ." 

Y.  2.  In  the  excellence  of  his  doctrine^  also,  Christ  was  su- 
perior to  all  other  teachers,  because  he  revealed  to  mankind, 
together  and  at  once,  the  fullness  of  the  very  Godhead,  and 
the  complete  aud  latest  will  of  his  Father  respecting  the  sal- 
vation of  men  ;  so  that,  either  as  it  regards  the  matter  or  the 
clearness  of  the  exposition,  no  addition  can  be  made  to  it,  nor 
vis  it  necessary  that  it  should. 

YI.  From  their  belief  in  this  religion,  and  their  profession 
of  it,  the  professors  were  called  Christians.  (Acts  xi,  26  ;  1 
Pet.  iv,  16.)  That  the  excellence  of  this  name  may  really  be- 
long to  a  person,  it  is  not  sufficient  for  him  to  acknowledge 
Christ  as  a  teacher  and  prophet  divinely  called.  But  he 
must  likewise  religiously  own  and  worship  him  as  the  object 
of  this  doctrine,  though  the  former  knowledge  and  faith  pre- 
cede this,  and  though  from  it,  alone,  certain  persons  are  some- 
times said  to  have  believed  in  Christ. 


DISPUTATIOI^  XIII. 

ON  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION,    WITH  REGARD  TO  THE  MATTER 
GENERALLY. 

1.  Since  God  is  the  object  of  all  religion,  in  its  various  mod- 
ifications, he  must  likewise  be  the  object  of  this  religion.  But 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


20 


Christ,  in  reference  to  God,  is  also  an  object  of  it,  as  having 
been  appointed  by  God  the  Father,  Kino  and  Lord  of  the 
universe,  and  the  Head  of  his  church. 

II.  For  this  reason,  in  a  treatise  on  the  Christian  religion, 
the  following  subjects  come,  in  due  order,  under  our  conside- 
ration :  (1.)  The  object  itself,  towards  which  faith  and  religious 
worship  ought  to  tend.  (2.)  The  cause,  on  account  of  which, 
faith  and  worship  may  and  ought  to  be  performed  to  the  ob- 
ject. (3.)  The  very  act  of  faith  and  worship,  and  the  method 
of  each,  according  to  the  command  of  God  and  Christ.  (4.) 
Salvation  itself,  which,  as  being  promised  and  desired,  has  the 
power  of  an  impelling  cause,  which,  when  obtained,  is  the 
reward  of  the  observance  of  religion,  and  from  which  arises 
the  everlasting  glory  of  God  in  Christ. 

III.  But  man,  by  whom  [the  duties  of]  this  religion  must 
be  executed,  is  a  sinner,  yet  one  for  whom  remission  of  sins 
and  reconciliation  have  novf  been  obtained,  this  mark,  it 
is  intended  to  be  distinguished  from  the  religion  of  the  Jews, 
which  God  also  prescribed  to  sinners ;  but  it  was  at  a  time 
when  remission  of  sins  had  not  been  obtained,  on  Avhich  ac- 
count, the  mode  of  religion  was  likewise  different,  particularly 
with  regard  to  ceremonies. 

TV.  This  religion,  with  regard  to  all  those  things  which  we 
have  mentioned  as  coming  under  consideration  in  it,  is,  of  all 
religions,  the  most  excellent ;  or,  rather,  it  is  the  most  excel- 
lent mode  of  religion.  Because,  in  it,  the  object  is  proposed 
in  a  manner  the  most  excellent ;  so  that  there  is  nothing  about 
this  object  which  the  human  mind  is  capable  of  perceiving, 
that  is  not  exhibited  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian  religion. 
For  God  has  with  it  disclosed  all  his  own  [honuTri]  ,  goodness, 
and  has  given  it  to  be  viewed  in  Christ. 

Y.  The  cause,  on  account  of  which,  religion  may  and  ought 
to  be  performed  to  this  object,  is,  in  every  way,  the  most  effi- 
cacious ;  so  that  nothing  can  be  imagined,  why  religion  may 
and  ought  to  be  performed  to  any  other  deity,  that  is  not  com- 
prehended in  the  efficacy  of  this  cause,  in  a  pre-eminent 
manner. 

YI.  The  very  act  of  faith  and  worship  is  required,  and  must 


30 


JAMES  ABMINIUS. 


be  performed,  in  a  manner  the  most  signal  and  particular  v^*^ 
and  the  salvation  which  arises  from  this,  act,  is  the  greatest 
and  niost  glorious,  both  because  God  will  afford  a  fuller  and 
more  perfect  sight  of  himself,  than  if  salvation  had  been  ob- 
tained throuo-h  another  form  of  reliscion,  and  because  those 
who  will  become  partakers  of  this  salvation,  will  have  Christ 
eternally  as  their  head,  who  is  the  brother  of  men,  and  they 
will  always  behold  him.  On  this  account,  in  the  attainment 
and  possession  of  salvation,  we  shall  hereafter  become,  in  some 
measure,  superior  to  the  angels  themselves. 


DISPUTATION  XIY. 

ON  THE  OBJECT  OF  THE  CHEISTIAN"  RELIGION  :  AND,  FIRST,  ABOUT 
GOD,  ITS  PRIMARY  OBJECT,  AND  WHAT   GOD  IS. 

I.  The  object  of  the  Christian  religion  is  that  towards  which 
the  faith  and  worship  of  a  religious  man  ought  to  tend.  This 
object  is  God  and  his  Christ — God  principally,  Christ  subor 
dinately  under  God — God  per  se,  Christ  as  God  has  constitu- 
ted him  the  object  of  this  religion. 

II.  In  God,  who  is  the  primary  object  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion, three  things  come  in  order  under  our  consideration : 
(1.)  The  nature  of  God,  of  which  the  excellence  and  goodness 
is  such  that  religion  can  honorably  and  usefully  be  performed 
to  it.  (2.)  The  acts  of  God,  on  account  of  which  religion 
ought  to  be  performed  to  him.  (3.)  The  will  of  God,  by 
which  he  wills  religion  to  be  performed  to  himself,  and  that 
he  who  performs  it  be  rewarded ;  and,  on  the  contrary, 
that  the  neglecter  of  it  be  punished. 

III.  To  every  treatise  on  the  nature  of  God,  must  be  pre- 
fixed this  primary  and  chief  axiom  of  all  religion  :  "There  is 
a  God."  Without  this,  vain  is  every  inquiry  into  the  nature 
of  God;  for,  if  the  divine  nature  had  no  existence,  religion 
would  be  a  mere  jjhantasm  of  man's  conception. 

lY.  Though  [Detim  esse]  the  existence  of  God  has  been  in- 


PEIVATE  DISPTJTATIONS. 


31 


timated  to  every  rational  creature  that  perceives  his  voice, 
and  though  this  truth  is  known  to  every  one  who  reflects  on 
such  an  intimation  ;  yet,  "that  there  is  a  God,"  may  be  dem- 
onstrated by  various  arguments.  First,  by  certain  theoretical 
axioms  ;  and  because  when  the  terms  in  w^hich  these  are  ex- 
pressed have  been  once  understood,  they  are  known  to  be  true, 
they  deserve  to  receive  the  name  \7iotionum  insitarum]  of 
"  implanted  ideas." 

Y.  The  first  axiom  is,  "  I^othing  is  or  can  be  from  itself." 
For  thus  it  would  at  one  and  the  same  time,  be  and  not  be,  it 
would  be  both  prior  and  posterior  to  itself,  and  would  be  both 
the  cause  and  effect  of  itself  Therefore,  some  one  being  must 
necessarily  be  pre-existent,  from  whom,  as  from  the  primary 
and  supreme  cause,  all  other  things  derive  their  origin.  But 
this  being  is  God. 

YI.  The  second  axiom  is,  "  Every  efficient  primary  cause 
is  better  or  more  excellent  than  its  effect."  From  this,  it  fol- 
lows that,  as  all  created  minds  are  in  the  order  of  effects,  some 
one  mind  is  supreme  and  most  wise,  from  which  the  rest  have 
their  origin.    But  this  mind  is  God. 

YII.  The  third  axiom  is,  No  finite  force  can  make  some- 
thing out  of  nothing ;  and  the  first  nature  has  been  made  out 
of  nothing."  For,  if  it  were  otherwise,  it  neither  could  nor 
ought  to  be  changed  by  an  efiicient  or  a  former ;  and  thus, 
nothing  could  be  made  from  it.  From  this,  it  follows,  either 
that  all  things  which  exist  have  been  from  eternity  and  are 
primary  beirig,  or  that  there  is  one  primary  being.  But  this 
being  is  God. 

YIII.  The  same  truth  is  proved  by  the  practical  axiom,  or 
the  conscience,  which  has  its  seat  in  all  rational  creatures.  It 
excuses  and  exhilarates  a  man  in  good  actions  ;  and,  in  those 
which  are  evil,  it  accuses  and  torments — even  in  those  things 
[of  both  kinds]  which  have  not  come,  and  which  never  will 
come,  to  the  knowledge  of  any  creature.  This  stands  as  a 
manifest  indication  that  there  is  some  supreme  judge,  who 
will  institute  a  strict  inquiry,  and  will  pass  judgment.  But 
this  judge  is  God. 


32 


JAMES  AEMHOUS. 


IX.  The  magnitude,  the  perfection,  the  multitude,  the  vari- 
ety, and  the  argument  of  all  things  that  exist,  supply  us  with 
the  fifth  argreement,  which  loudly  proclaims  that  all  these 
things  proceed  from  one  and  the  same  being  and  not  from 
many  beings.    But  this  being  is  God. 

X.  The  sixth  argument  is  from  the  order  perceptible  in 
things,  and  from  the  [ordinata\  orderly  disposition  and  direc- 
tion of  all  of  them  to  an  end,  even  of  those  things  which,  de- 
void of  reason,  themselves,  cannot  act  on  account  of  an  end, 
or  at  least,  cannot  intend  an  end.  But  all  order  is  from  one 
being,  and  direction  to  an  end  is  from  a  wise  and  good  being. 
But  this  being  is  God. 

XI.  The  preservation  of  political,  ecclesiastical  and  eco- 
nomical society  among  mankind,  furnishes  our  seventh  argu- 
ment. Amidst  such  great  perversity  and  madness  of  Satan 
and  of  evil  men,  human  society  could  never  attain  to  any  sta- 
bility or  firmness,  except  it  were  preserved  safe  and  unim- 
paired by  ONE  who  is  supremely  powerful.    But  this  is  God. 

XII.  We  take  our  eighth  argument  from  the  miracles 
which  we  believe  to  have  been  done,  and  which  we  perceive 
to  be  done,  the  magnitude  of  which  is  so  great  as  to  cause 
them  far  to  exceed  the  entire  force  and  power  of  the  created 
universe.  Therefore,  a  cause  must  exist  which  transcends  the 
universe  and  its  power  or  capability.    But  this  cause  is  God. 

XIII.  The  predictions  of  future  and  contingent  things,  and 
their  accurate  and  strict  completion,  supply  the  ninth  argu- 
ment as  being  things  which  could  proceed  from  no  one  except 
from  God. 

Xiy.  In  the  last  place,  is  added,  the  perpetual  and  univer- 
sal [consensus]  argreement  of  all  nations,  which  general  con- 
sent must  be  accounted  as  equivalent  to  a  law,  nay  to  a  di- 
vine oracle. 

COEOLLARY. 

On  account  of  the  dissensions  of  very  learned  men,  we  al- 
low this  question  to  be  discussed,  "  from  the  motion  which  is 


PEIYATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


33 


apparent  in  the  world,  and  from  tlie  fact,  that  whatever  is 
moved  is  moved  by  another,  can  it  be  concluded  that  there 
is  a  God  f 


DISPUTATION^  XY. 

OE    THE    NATUKE   OF  GOD. 

I.  Concerning  God,  the  primary  object  of  theology,  two 
things  must  be  known,  (1.)  His  nature,  or  [qid'fi  what  God 
is,  or  rather  [qiialis]  what  qualities  does  he  possess?  (2.) 
Who  God  is,  or  to  whom  this  nature  must  be  attributed. 
These  must  be  known,  lest  any  thing  foolish  or  unbecoming  be 
ascribed  to  God,  or  lest  another,  or  a  strange  one,  be  consider- 
ed as  the  true  God.  On  the  first  of  these  we  will  now  treat 
in  a  few  disputations. 

II.  As  we  are  not  able  to  know  the  nature  of  God,  in  itself, 
we  can,  in  a  measure,  attain  to  some  knowdedge  from  the  anal- 
ogy of  the  nature  which  is  in  created  things,  and  principally 
that  which  is  in  ourselves,  who  are  created  after  the  image  of 
God ;  while  we  always  add  a  mode  of  eminence  to  this  anal  ■ 
ogy,  according  to  which  mode  God  is  understood  to  exceed, 
infinitely,  the  perfections  of  things  created. 

III.  As  in  the  whole  nature  of  things,  and  in  man,  who  is 
the  compendium  or  abridgment  of  it,  only  two  things  can  be 
considered  as  essential,  whether  they  be  disparted  in  their  sub- 
jects, or,  in  a  certain  order,  connected  with  each  other  and 
subordinate  in  the  same  subject,  which  two  things  are  essence 
and  LIFE  ;  we  will  also  contemplate  the  nature  of  God  accord- 
ing to  these  two  {momenta]  impulses  of  his  nature.  For  the 
four  degrees,  which  are  proposed  by  several  divines — to  he^  to 
live^  to  feel^  and  to  understand — are  restricted  to  these  two 
causes  of  motion  ;  because  the  word  "  to  live,"  embraces  with- 
in itself  both  feeling  and  understanding, 

lY.  We  say  the  essence  of  God  is  the  first  impulse  of  the 


34 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


divine  nature,  by  which  God  is  purely  and  simply  understood 
to  be. 

Y.  As  the  whole  nature  of  things  is  distributed  according 
to  their  essence,  into  body  and  spirit,  we  affirm  that  the  divine 
essence  is  spiritual,  and  from  this,  that  God  is  a  Spirit,  be- 
cause it  could  not  possibly  come  to  pass  that  the,  first  and 
chief  being  should  be  corporeal.  From  this,  one  cannot  do 
otherwise  than  justly  admire  the  transcendent  force  and  plen- 
itude of  God,  by  which  he  is  capable  of  creating  even  things 
corporeal  that  have  nothing  analogous  to  himself. 

YI.  To  the  essence  of  God  no  attribute  can  be  added,  wheth- 
er distinguished  from  it  in  reality,  [ratione]  by  relation,  or  by 
a  mere  conception  of  the  mind  ;  but  only  a  mode  of  pre-emi- 
nence can  be  attributed  to  it,  according  to  which  it  is  under- 
stood to  comprise  within  itself  and  to  exceed  all  the  perfections 
of  all  things.  This  mode  may  be  declared  in  this  one  expres- 
sion :  "  The  divine  essence  is  uncaused  and  without  com- 
mencement." 

YII.  Hence,  it  follows  that  this  essence  is  simple  and  infi- 
nite ;  from  this,  that  it  is  eternal  and  [immensam]  immeasura- 
ble ;  and, lastly,  that  it  is  unchangeable,  impassible  and  incor- 
ruptible, in  the  manner  in  which  it  has  been  proved  by  us  in 
our  public  theses  on  this  subject. 

YIII.  And  since  \_umim  et  lomiin]  unity  and  goodness  re- 
ciprocate with  being,  and  as  the  affections  or  passions  of  every 
being  are  general,  we  also  affirm  that  the  essence  of  God  is 
one,  and  that  God  is  one  according  to  it,  and  is,  therefore, 
good — nay,  the  chief  good,  from  the  participation  of  which  all 
things  have  both  [quod  sint]  their  being,  and  [^uod  lona  sint\ 
their  well  being. 

IX.  As  this  essence  is  itself  pure  from  all  composition,  so 
it  cannot  enter  into  the  composition  of  any  thing.  We  permit 
it  to  become  a  subject  of  discussion,  whether  this  be  designa- 
ted in  the  Scriptures  by  the  name  of  "  holiness,"  which  de- 
notes separation  or  a  heing  separated. 

X.  These  modes  of  pre-eminence  are  not  communicable  to 
any  thing,  fi*om  the  very  circumstance  of  their  being  such. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


35 


And  when  these  modes  are  contemplated  in  the  life  of  God, 
and  in  the  faculties  of  his  life,  they  are  of  infinite  useful- 
ness in  theology,  and  are  not  among  the  smallest  foundations 
of  true  religion. 


DISPUTATION  XYI. 

ON  THE  LIFE  OF  GOD. 

I.  Life  is  that  which  comes  under  our  consideration,  in  the 
second  [momento]  impulse  of  the  divine  nature ;  and  that  it 
belongs  to  God,  is  not  only  evident  from  its  own  nature,  but 
is  likewise  known,  per  se^  to  all  those  who  have  any  concep- 
tion of  God.  For  it  is  much  more  incredible  that  God  is 
something  \inane]  senseless  and  dead,  than  that  there  is  no 
God.  And  the  life  of  God  is  easily  proved  [a  posteriori ^^ 
Eor,  as  whatever  is  beside  God  is  from  him,  we  must  also  at- 
tribute life  to  him,  because  among  his  creatures  are  many 
things  which  have  life ;  and  we  affirm  that  God  is  a  living 
substance,  and  that  life  belongs  to  him,  not  only  eminently 
but  also  formally,  since  life  is  simply  perfection. 

II.  But,  as  life  is  taken,  either  in  the  second  act,  and  is  call- 
ed "  operation,"  or  in  the  first,  principal  and  radical  act,  and 
thus  is  the  very  nature  and  form  of  a  living  thing,  we  attrib- 
ute this,  of  itself,  primarily  and  adequately  to  God ;  so  that  he 
is  the  life  of  himeslf,  not  having  it  from  his  union  with  another 
thing;  (for  that  is  the  part  of  imperfection,)  but  existing  the 
same  as  it  does — he  being  life  itself,  and  living  by  the  first  act, 
but  bestowing  life  by  the  second  act. 

III.  The  life  of  God,  therefore,  is  most  simple,  so  that  it  is 
not,  in  reality,  distinguished  from  his  essence  ;  and  according 
to  the  confined  capacity  of  our  conception,  by  which  it  is  dis- 
tinguished from  his  essence,  it  may,  in  some  degree,  be  de- 
scribed as  being  "  an  act  that  flows  from  the  essence  of  God," 
by  which  is  intimated  that  it  is  active  in  itself;  first,  by  a  re- 
flex act  on  God  himself,  and  then  on  other  objects,  on  account 


36 


JAMES  ARMENTUS. 


of  the  most  abundant  copiousness,  and  the  most  perfect  activ- 
ity of  life  in  God. 

lY.  The  life  of  God  is  the  foundation  and  the  proximate 
and  adequate  principle  not  only  of  ad  intra  et  ad  extra^  an  in- 
ward and  an  outward  act,  but  likewise  of  all  fruition  bj  which 
God  is  said  to  be  blessed  in  himself  This  seems  to  be  the 
cause  why  God  wished  himself,  principally  in  reference  to  life, 
to  be  distinguished  from  false  gods  and  dead  idols,  and  why 
he  wished  men  to  swear  by  his  name,  in  a  form  composed 
thus:  "The  Lord  liveth." 

Y.  As  the  essence  of  God  is  infinite  and  most  simple,  eter- 
nal, impassible,  unchangeable  and  incorruptible,  we  ought 
likewise  to  consider  his  life  with  these  modes  of  being  and  life ; 
on  which  account  we  attribute  to  him  per  se  immortality,  and 
a  most  promjDt,  powerful,  indefatigable  and  insatiable  desire, 
strength  and  delight  to  act  and  to  enjoy,  and  in  action  and  en- 
joyment, if  it  be  lawful,  thus  to  express  ourselves. 

YI.  By  two  faculties,  the  understanding  and  the  will,  this 
life  is  active  towards  God  himself ;  but  towards  other  things 
it  is  active  by  three  faculties,  power,  or  capability,  being  ad- 
ded to  the  two  preceding.  But  the  faculties  of  the  under- 
standing and  the  will  are  accommodated  to  fruition,  and  this 
chiefly  as  they  tend  towards  God  himself ;  secondarily,  and 
because  it  thus  pleases  him  of  his  abundant  goodness,  as  they 
tend  towards  the  creatures. 


DISPUTATION  XYII. 

ON  THE  TJNDEESTANDING  OF  GOD. 

I.  The  understanding  of  God  is  that  faculty  of  his  life  which 
is  first  in  nature  and  order,  and  by  which  the  living  God  dis- 
tinctly understands  all  things  and  every  one,  which,  in  what 
manner  soever,  either  have,  will  have,  have  had,  can  have,  or 
might  hypothetically  have,  a  being  of  any  kind,  by  which  he 
also  distinctly  understands  the  order,  connection,  and  relation 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


37 


of  all  and  each  of  tliem  between  each  other,  and  the  entities  of 
reason,  those  beings  which  exist,  or  which  can  exist,  in  the 
mind,  imagination,  and  enunciation. 

II.  God  knows  all  things,  neither  by  intelligible  [species] 
representations,  nor  bj  similitude,  but  by  his  own  and  sole 
essence ;  with  the  exception  of  evil  things,  which  he  knows 
indirectly  by  the  good  things  opposed  to  them,  as  privation  is 
known  [mediante  habitu]  by  means  of  our  having  been  ac- 
customed to  any  thing. 

III.  The  mode  by  which  God  understands,  is,  not  by  com- 
position and  division,  not  by  [disciii'sum]  gradual  argumenta- 
tion, but  by  simple  and  infinite  intuition,  according  to  the 
succession  of  order  and  not  of  time. 

lY.  The  succession  of  order,  in  the  objects  of  the  divine 
knowledge,  is  in  this  manner :  First.  God  knows  himself 
entirely  and  adequately,  and  this  understanding  is  his  own 
[esse]  essence  or  being.  Secondly.  He  knows  all  possible 
things,  in  the  perfection  of  his  own  essence,  and,  therefore,  all 
things  impossible.  In  the  understanding  of  possible  things, 
this  is  the  order:  (1.)  He  knows  what  things  can  exist  by 
his  own  primary  and  sole  act.  (2.)  He  knows  what  things, 
from  the  creatures,  whether  they  will  come  into  existence  or 
will  not,  can  exist  by  his  conservation,  motion,  assistance, 
concurrence,  and  permission.  (3.)  He  knows  what  things  he 
can  do  about  the  acts  of  the  creatures  [con^veni enter]  consist- 
ently with  himself  or  with  these  acts.  Thiedly.  He  knows 
all  entities,  even  according  to  the  same  order  as  that  which 
we  have  just  shown  in  his  knowledge  of  things  possible. 

Y.  The  understanding  of  God  is  certain  and  infallible ;  so 
that  he  sees  certainly  and  infallibly,  even,  things  future  and 
contingent,  whether  he  sees  them  in  their  causes,  or  in  them- 
selves. But  this  infallibility  depends  on  the  infinity  of  the 
essence  of  God,  and  not  on  his  unchangeable  will. 

YI3  The  act  of  understanding  of  God  [causatur]  is  occasioned 
by  no  external  cause,  not  even  by  its  object ;  though  if  there 
be  not  afterwards  an  object,  neither  will  there  be  any  act  of 
God's  understanding  about  it. 

YH.  How  certain  soever  the  acts  of  God's  understanding 


38 


JAMES  AEMINroS. 


may  themselves  be,  this  does  not  impose  any  necessity  on 
things,  but  rather  establishes  contingency  in  them.  For,  as 
he  knows  the  thing  itself  and  its  mode,  if  the  mode  of  the 
thing  be  contingent,  he  must  know  it  as  such,  and,  therefore, 
it  remains  contingent  with  respect  to  the  divine  knowledge. 

YIII.  The  knowledge  of  God  may  be  distinguished  accord- 
ing to  its  objects.  And,  first,  into  the  theoretical^  by  which 
he  understands  things  under  the  relation  of  entity  and  truth  ; 
and  into  the  iiractical^  by  which  he  considers  things  under  the 
relation  of  good,  and  as  objects  of  his  wall  and  power. 

IX.  Secondly.  One  [quality  of  the]  knowledge  of  God  is 
that  of  simple  intelligence^  by  which  he  understands,  himself, 
all  possible  things,  and  the  nature  and  essence  of  all  entities  ; 
another  is  that  of  vision^  by  which  he  beholds  his  own  ex- 
istence and  that  of  all  other  entities  or  beings. 

X.  The  knowledge  by  which  God  knows  his  own  essence 
and  existence,  all  things  possible,  and  the  nature  and  essence 
of  all  entities,  is  simply  necessary,  as  pertaining  to  the  per- 
fection of  his  own  knowledge.  But  that  by  which  he  knows 
the  existence  of  other  entities,  is  hypothetically  necessary, 
that  is,  if  they  now  have,  have  already  had,  or  shall  afterwards 
have,  any  existence.  For  when  any  object,  whatsoever,  is  laid 
down,  it  must,  of  necessity,  fall  within  the  knowledge  of  God. 
The  former  of  these  precedes  every  free  act  of  the  divine  will ; 
the  latter  follows  every  free  act.  The  schoolmen,  therefore, 
denominate  the  first  "  natural^''  and  the  second  '•''free  knowl- 
edge." 

XI.  The  knowledge  by  which  God  knows  any  thing  \siJiOG 
8it\  if  it  be  or  exist,  is  \medi(£\  intermediate  between  the  two 
[kinds]  described  in  theses  IX  &  X :  In  fact  it  precedes  the 
free  act  of  the  will  with  regard  to  intelligence.  But  it  knows 
something  future  according  to  vision^  only  through  its  hy- 
pothesis. 

XII.  Free  knowledge,  or  that  of  vision,  which  is  also  called 
"  prescience,"  is  not  the  cause  of  things  ;  but  the  knowledge 
which  is  practical  and  of  simple  intelligence,  and  which  is 
denominated  "  natural,"  or  "  necessary,"  is  the  cause  of  all 
things  by  the  mode  of  prescribing  and  directing  to  which  is 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


39 


added  the  action  of  the  will  and  of  the  capability.  The  mid- 
dle or  intermediate  [kind  of]  knowledge  ought  to  intervene  in 
things  which  depend  on  the  liberty  of  created  [arhitrii]  choice 
or  pleasure. 

XIII.  From  the  variety  and  multitude  of  objects,  and  from 
the  means  and  mode  of  intelligence  and  vision,  it  is  apparent 
that  infinite  knowledge  and  omniscience  are  justly  attributed 
to  God  ;  and  that  they  are  so  proper  or  peculiar  to  God  ac- 
cording to  their  objects,  means  and  mode,  as  not  to  be  capable 
of  appertaining  to  any  created  thing. 


DISPUTATION  XYIII. 

ON  THE  WILL  OF  GOD. 

I.  The  will  of  God  is  spoken  of  in  three  ways  :  First,  the 
faculty  itself  of  willing.  Secondly,  the  act  of  willing.  Thirdly, 
the  object  willed.  The  first  signification  is  the  principal  and 
proper  one,  the  two  others  are  secondary  and  figurative. 

II.  It  may  be  thus  described  :  It  is  the  second  faculty  of 
the  life  of  God,  flowing  through  the  understanding  from  the 
life  [ulterius  tendente]  that  has  an  ulterior  tendency  ;  by  which 
faculty  God  is  borne  towards  a  known  good — towards  a 
goody  because  this  is  an  adequate  object  of  every  will — to- 
wards a  known  good^  not  only  with  regard  to  it  as  a  being, 
but  likewise  as  a  good,  whether  in  reality  or  only  in  the  act 
of  the  divine  understanding.  Both,  however,  are  shewn  by 
the  understanding.  But  the  evil  which  is  called  \cuI^(b\  that 
of  culpability,  God  does  not  simply  and  absolutely  will. 

III.  The  good  is  two-fold.  The  chief  good,  and  that  which 
is  from  the  chief.  The  first  of  these  is  the  primary,  immedi- 
ate, principal,  direct,  peculiar  and  adequate  object  of  the 
divine  will ;  the  latter  is  secondary  and  indirect,  towards 
which  the  divine  will  does  not  tend,  except  by  means  of  the 
chief  good. 

lY .  The  will  of  God  is  borne  towards  its  objects  in  the  follow- 


40 


JAMES  AEMmnJS. 


ing  order  :  (1.)  He  wills  himself.  (2.)  He  wills  all  those  things 
which,  out  of  infinite  things  possible  to  himself,  he  has,  bv  the 
last  judgment  of  his  wisdom,  [judicavit]  determined  to  be 
made.  And  firsts  he  wills  to  make  them  to  be ;  then  he  is 
affected  towards  them  by  his  will,  according  as  they  possess 
some  likeness  with  his  nature,  or  some  vestige  of  it.  (3.) 
The  third  object  of  the  will  of  God  is  those  things  which  he 
judges  fit  and  equitable  to  be  done  by  creatures  who  are  en- 
dowed with  understanding  and  with  free  will,  in  which  is 
included  a  prohibition  of  that  which  he  wills  not  to  be  done. 
(4.)  The  fourth  object  of  the  divine  will  is  his  permission,  that 
chiefly  by  which  he  permits  a  rational  creature  to  do  what  he 
has  prohibited,  and  to  omit  w^hat  he  has  commanded.  (5.) 
He  wills  those  things  which,  according  to  his  own  wisdom,  he 
judges  to  be  done  concerning  the  acts  of  his  rational  creatures. 

Y.  There  is  [extra]  out  of  God  no  inwardly  moving  cause 
of  his  will ;  nor  out  of  him  is  there  any  end.  But  the  crea- 
ture, and  its  action  or  passion,  may  be  the  outwardly  moving 
cause,  without  which  God  would  supersede  or  omit  that  voli- 
tion or  act  of  willing. 

YI.  But  the  cause  of  all  other  things  is  God,  by  his  under- 
standing and  will,  by  means  of  his  power  or  capability  ;  yet 
so,  that  when  he  acts  either  through  his  creatures,  with  them 
or  in  them,  he  does  not  take  away  the  peculiar  mode  of  acting, 
or  of  sufl'ering,  which  he  has  divinely  placed  within  them ; 
and  that  he  sufiTers  them,  according  to  their  peculiar  mode,  to 
produce  their  own  efiects,  and  to  receive  in  themselves  the 
acts  of  God,  either  necessarily,  contingently,  or  freely.  As 
this  contingency  and  liberty  do  not  make  the  prescience  of 
God  to  be  uncertain,  so  they  are  destroyed  by  the  volition  of 
God,  and  by  the  certain  futurition  of  events  with  regard  to 
the  understanding  of  God. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


41 


DISPUTATIOlsr  XIX. 

ON  THE  VARIOUS  DISTINCTIONS  OF  THE  WILL  OF  GOD. 

I.  Though  the  will  of  God  be  one  and  simple,  yet  it  may 
be  variously  distinguished,  from  its  objects,  in  reference  to  the 
mode  and  order  according  to  which  it  is  borne  towards  its 
objects.  Of  these  distinctions  the  use  is  important  in  the 
whole  of  the  Scriptures,  and  in  explaining  many  passages  in 
them, 

II.  1.  The  will  of  God  is  borne  towards  its  object  either 
according  to  tlie  mode  of  nature,  or  that  of  liberty.  In  refer- 
ence to  the  former.  Go  1  tends  towards  his  own  primaiy,  proper 
and  adequate  object,  that  is,  towards  himself  But,  according 
to  the  mode  of  liberty,  he  tends  towards  other  things — and 
towards  all  other  things  by  the  liberty  of  exercise,  and  towards 
many  by  the  liberty  of  specitication  ;  because  he  cannot  hate 
things,  so  far  as  they  have  some  likeness  ot*  God,  that  is,  so  far 
as  they  are  good ;  though  he  is  not  necessarily  bound  to  love 
them,  since  he  might  reduce  them  to  nothing  whenever  it 
seemed  good  to  himself. 

III.  2.  The  will  of  God  is  distinguished  into  that  by  whichi 
he  absolutely  wills  to  do  any  thing  or  to  prevent  it ;  and  into 
that  by  which  he  wills  something  to  be  done  or  omitted  by  his 
rational  creatures.  The  former  of  these  is  called  "  the  will 
of  his  good  pleasure,"  or  rather  "  of  his  pleasure and  the 
latter,  "  that  [signi]  of  his  open  intimation."  The  latter  is 
revealed,  for  this  is  required  by  the  use  to  which  it  is  applied. 
The  former  is  partly  revealed,  partly  secret,  or  hidden.  The 
former  employs  a  power  that  is  either  irresistible,  or  that  is  so 
accommodated  to  the  object  and  subject  as  to  obtain  or  insure 
its  success,  though  it  was  possible  for  it  to  happen  otherwise* 
To  these  two  kinds  of  the  divine  will,  is  opposed  the  remission 
of  the  will,  thpt  is,  a  two-fold  permission,  the  one  opposed  to 
the  will  of  open  intimation,  the  other  to  that  of  good  pleasure. 
The  lormer  is  that  by  which  God  permits  something  to  the 
[potestas]  power  of  a  rational  creature,  by  not  circumscribing 

4  VOL  u. 


4 


42 


JAMES  AEMUmjS. 


gome  act  by  a  law  ;  the  latter  is  that  by  which  God  permits 
something  to  the  will  and  {potentid]  capability  of  the  creature, 
by  not  placing  an  impediment  in  its  way,  by  which  the  act 
may  in  reality  be  hindered. 

lY.  Whatever  things  God  wills  to  do,  he  wills  them  (1,) 
either  from  himself,  not  on  account  of  any  other  cause  placed 
beyond  him,  (whether  that  be  without  the  consideration  of  any 
act  perpetrated  by  the  creature,  or  solely  from  the  occasion  of 
the  act  of  the  creature,)  (2,)  or  on  account  of  a  preceding  cause 
afforded  by  the  creature.  In  reference  to  this  distinction,  some 
work  is  said  to  be  "  proper  to  God,"  some  other  "  extraneous, 
strange  and  foreign."  But  there  is  a  two-fold  difference  in 
those  things  which  he  wills  to  be  done  ;  for  they  are  pleasing 
and  acceptable  to  God,  either  in  themselves,  as  in  the  case  of 
moral  works  ;  or  they  please  accidentally  and  on  account  of 
some  other  thing,  as  in  the  case  of  things  ceremonial. 

Y.  3.  The  will  of  God  is  either  peremptory,  or  with  a  con- 
dition. (1.)  His  peremptory  will  is  that  which  strictly  and 
rigidly  obtains,  such  as  the  words  of  the  gospel  which  contain 
the  last  revelation  of  God :  "  The  wrath  of  God  abides  on 
him  who  does  not  believe ;"  ''He  that  believes  shall  be  saved ;" 
also  the  words  of  Samuel  to  Saul :  "  The  Lord  hath  rejected 
thee  from  being  king  over  Israel."  (2.)  His  will,  with  a  con- 
dition, is  that  which  has  a  condition  annexed,  whether  it  be 
a  tacit  one,  such  as,  "  Yet  forty  days,  and  Nineveh  shall  be 
overthrown."  "  Cursed  is  every  one  that  continueth  not  in  all 
things  which  are  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do  them," 
that  is,  unless  he  be  delivered  from  this  curse,  as  it  is  expressed 
in  Gal.  iii,  13.    See  also  Jer.  xviii,  7-10. 

YI.  4.  One  will  of  God  is  absolute,  another  respective. 
His  absolute  will  is  that  by  which  he  wills  any  thing  simply, 
without  regard  to  the  volition  or  act  of  the  creature,  such  as  is 
that  about  the  salvation  of  believers.  His  resjpective  will  is 
that  by  which  he  wills  something  with  respect  to  the  volition 
or  the  act  of  the  creature.  It  is  also  either  antecedent  or  con- 
sequent. (1.)  The  antecedent  is  that  by  which  he  wills  some- 
thing with  respect  to  the  subsequent  will  or  act  of  the  creature, 
as,  "  God  wills  all  men  to  be  saved  if  they  believe."    (2.)  The 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


43 


consequent  is  that  by  which  he  wills  something  with  respect 
to  the  antecedent  volition  or  act  of  the  creature,  as,  "  Woe  to 
that  man  by  whom  the  Son  of  man  is  betrayed  !  Better  would 
it  have  been  for  that  man  if  he  had  never  been  born  !"  Both 
depend  on  the  absolute  will,  and  according  to  it  each  of  them 
is  regulated. 

YII.  5.  God  wills  some  things,  so  far  as  they  are  good, 
when  absolutely  considered  according  to  their  nature.  Thus 
he  wills  alms-giving,  and  to  do  good  to  man  so  far  as  he  is  his 
creature.  He  also  wills  some  other  things,  so  far  as,  all  cir- 
cumstances considered,  they  are  understood  to  be  good.  Ac- 
cording to  this  will,  he  says  to  the  wicked  man,  "  What  hast 
thou  to  do,  that  thou  shouldst  take  mj  covenant  in  thy  mouth?" 
And  he  speaks  thus  to  Eli :  "  Be  it  far  from  me  that  thy 
house,  and  the  house  of  thy  father,  should  walk  before  me  for 
ever ;  for  them  that  honor  me  I  will  honor,  and  they  that 
despise  me  shall  be  lightly  esteemed."  This  distinction  does 
not  differ  greatly  from  the  antecedent  will  of  God,  which  has 
been  already  mentioned. 

YIII.  6.  God  wills  some  things  per  se  or  per  accidens. 
Of  themselves^  he  wills  those  things  which  are  simply  and 
relatively  good.  Thus  he  wills  salvation  to  that  man  who  is 
obedient.  Accidentally^  those  things  which,  in  some  respect 
are  evil,  but  have  a  good  joined  with  them,  which  God  wills 
more  than  the  respective  good  things  that  are  opposed  to  those 
evil.  Thus  he  wills  the  evils  of  punishment,  because  he 
chooses  that  the  order  of  justice  be  preserved  in  punishment, 
rather  than  that  a  sinning  creature  should  escape  punishment, 
though  this  impunity  might  be  for  the  good  of  the  creature. 

IX.  Y.  God  wills  some  things  in  their  antecedent  causes^ 
that  is,  he  wills  their  causes  {secundum  quod']  relatively,  and 
[sic  ordinat]  j^laces  them  in  such  order  that  effects  may  follow 
from  them  ;  and  if  they  do  follow,  he  wills  that  they,  of  them- 
selves, be  pleasing  to  him.  God  wills  other  things  in  themselves. 
This  distinction  does  not  substantially  differ  from  that  by 
which  the  divine  will  is  distinguished  into  absolute  and  re- 
spective. 


14 


JAMES  ABMINIIIS. 


COKOI.LARIES. 

I.  Is  it  possible  for  two  affirmatively  contrary  volitions  of 
God  to  tend  towards  one  object  which  is  the  same  and  uni- 
form ?    We  answer  in  the  negative. 

II.  Can  one  volition  of  God,  that  is,  one  formally,  tend 
towards  contrary  objects  ?  We  reply,  It  can  tend  towards 
objects  physically  contrary,  but  not  towards  objects  [ethice] 
morally  contrary. 

III.  Does  God  wi^l,  as  an  end,  something  wliich  is  [extra] 
beyond  himself,  and  which  does  not  proceed  from  his  free 
will  ?    We  reply  in  the  negative. 


DISPUTATIOIT  XX. 

QJJ-  THE  ATTEIBUTES  OF  GOD  WHICH  COME  TO  BE  CONSIDERED  UNDER 
HIS  WILL.  AND,  FIRST,  ON  THOSE  WHICH  HAVE  AN  ANALOGY  TO 
THE  AFFECTIONS  OR  PASSIONS  IN  RATIONAL  CREATURES. 

I.  Those  attributes  of  God  ought  to  be  considered,  which 
are  either  properly  or  figuratively  attributed  to  him  i  ,  the 
Scriptures,  according  to  a  certain  analogy  of  the  atfcctious  and 
virtiies  in  rational  creatures. 

If.  Those  divine  attributes  which  have  the  analogy  of 
affections,  may  be  referred  to  two  principal  kinds,  so  that  the 
first  class  may  contain  those  affections  which  are  simply  con- 
versant about  good  or  evil,  and  which  may  be  denominated 
primitive  affections  ;  and  the  second  may  com})re]iend  thoso 
which  are  exercised  about  good  and  evil  in  refoi'ence  to  their 
absence  or  presence,  and  which  may  be  called  affections 
derived  from  the  primitive. 

III.  The  primitive  affections  are  love,  (the  opposite  to  which* 
is  hatred,)  and  goodness  ;  and  with  these  are  connected  grace, 
benignity  and  mercy.  Love  is  prior  to  goodness  towards  tlie 
object,  which  is  God  himself ;  goodness  is  prior  to  love  towards 
that  object  which  is  some  other  than  God. 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


45 


lY.  Love  is  an  affection  of  union  in  God,  whose  objects  are 
not  only  God  himself  and  the  good  of  justice,  but  also  the 
creature,  [referens  Deum^']  imitating  or  related  to  God  either 
according  to  [imaginem^  likeness,  or  only  according  to  [yesti- 
giu?n]  impress,  and  the  felicity  of  the  creature.  But  this 
affection  is  borne  onwards  either  to  enjoy  and  to  have,  or  to 
do  good  ;  the  former  is  called  "  the  love  of  complacency  the 
latter,  "  the  love  of  Iriendship,"  which  falls  into  goodness* 
God  [complacet  sibi]  loves  himself  with  complacency  in  the 
perfection  of  his  own  nature,  wherefore  he  likewise  enjoys 
himself.  He  also  loves  himself  with  the  love  of  complacency 
in  his  effects  produced  [ad  extra]  externally  ;  both  in  acts  and 
works,  which  are  specimens  and  evident,  infallible  indications 
of  that  perfection.  Wherefore  he  may  be  said,  in  some 
degree,  likewise  to  enjoy  these  acts  and  w^orks.  Even  the 
justice  or  righteousness  performed  by  the  creature,  is  pleasing 
to  him  ;  wherefore  his  affection  is  extended  to  secure  it. 

Y.  Hatred  is  an  affection  of  separation  in  God,  whose 
T/zflry  object  is  injustice  or  unrighteousness ;  and  the  secondary^ 
the  misery  of  the  creature.  The  former  is  from  "  the  love  of 
complacency;"  the  latter,  from  "the  love  of  friendship." 
But  since  God  properly  loves  himself  and  the  good  of  justice, 
and  by  the  same  impulse  holds  iniquity  in  detestation ;  and 
since  he  secondarily  loves  the  creature  and  his  blessedness,  and 
in  that  impulse  hates  the  misery  of  the  creature,  that  is,  he 
wills  it  to  be  taken  away  from  the  creature ;  hence,  it  comes 
to  pass,  that  he  hates  the  creature  who  perseveres  in  unright- 
eousness, and  he  loves  his  misery. 

YI.  Hatred,  however,  is  not  collateral  to  love,  but  necessa- 
rily flowing  from  it ;  since  love  neither  does  nor  can  tend 
towards  all  those  things  which  [ohjiciunter']  become  objects  to 
the  understanding  of  God.  It  belongs  to  him,  therefore,  in 
the  first  act,  and  must  be  placed  in  him  prior  to  any  existence 
of  a  thing  worthy  of  hatred,  which  existence  being  laid  down, 
the  act  of  hatred  arises  from  it  by  a  natural  necessity,  not  bj 
liberty  of  the  will. 

YH.  But  since  love  does  not  perfectly  fill  the  whole  will 
of  Godj  it  has  goodness  uuited  with  it ;  which  also  is  an  affec- 


« 


46  JAMES  AJIMINTUS. 

tion  in  God  of  communicating  his  good.  .  Its  first  object  \ad 
ea;tra]  externally  is  nothing ;  and  this  is  so  necessarily  first, 
that,  when  it  is  removed,  no  communication  can  be  made  ex- 
ternally. Its  act  is  creation.  Its  second  object  is  the  creature 
as  a  creature ;  and  its  act  is  called  conservation,  or  sustenta- 
tion,  as  if  it  was  a  continuance  of  creation.  Its  third  object  is 
the  creature  performing  his  duty  according  to  the  command  of 
God  ;  and  its  act  is  the  elevation  to  a  more  w^orthy  and  feli- 
citous condition,  that  is,  the  communication  of  a  greater  good 
than  that  wdiich  the  creature  obtained  by  creation.  Both  these 
[progressus]  advances  of  goodness  may  also  be  appropriately 
denominated  "benignity,"  in  Hebrew '-(□n^  "kindness." 
Its  fourth  object  is  the  creature  not  performing  his  dut}^,  or 
sinful,  and  on  this  account  liable  to  misery  according  to  the 
just  judgment  of  God;  and  its  act  is  a  deliverance  from  sin 
through  the  remission  and  the  mortification  of  sin.  And  this 
progress  of  goodness  is  denominated  mercy,  which  is  an  aff'ec- 
tion  for  giving  succor  to  a  man  in  misery,  sin  \71ihil  obstante] 
presenting  no  obstacle. 

YIII.  Grace  is  a  certain  adjunct  of  goodness  and  love,  by 
which  is  signified  that  God  is  affected  to  communicate  his 
own  good  and  to  love  the  creatures,  not  through  merit  or  of 
debt,  not  by  any  cause  impelling  from  without,  nor  that  some- 
thing may  be  added  to  God  himself,  but  that  it  may  be  well 
with  him  on  whom  the  good  is  bestowed  and  who  is  beloved, 
which  may  also  receive  the  name  of  "  liberality."  According 
to  this,  God  is  said  to  be  "  rich  in  goodness,  mercy,"  &c. 

IX.  The  affections  which  spring  from  these,  and  which  are 
exercised  about  good  or  evil  as  each  is  present  or  absent, 
are  considered  as  having  an  analogy  either  in  those  things 
which  are  in  the  concupiscible  part  of  our  souls,  or  in  that 
which  is  irascible. 

X.  In  the  concujpiscihle  part  are,  first,  desire  and  that 
which  is  opposed  to  it ;  secondly,  joy  and  grief.  (1.)  Desire 
is  an  affection  of  obtaining  the  works  of  righteousness  from 
rational  creatures,  and  of  bestowing  a  remunerative  reward, 
as  well  as  of  inflicting  punishment  if ,  they  be  contumacious. 
To  this  is  opposed  the  affection  according  to  which  God  ex- 


PRIVATE  DISPXJTATIONS. 


47 


ecratesthe  works  of  unrighteousness,  and  the  omission  of  a  re- 
muneration. (2.)  Jo  J  is  an  affection  from  the  presence  of 
a  thing  that  is  [cotivenientis]  suitable  or  agreeable — such  as 
the  fruition  of  himself,  the  obedience  of  the  creature,  the  com- 
munication of  his  own  goodness,  and  the  destruction  of  his 
rebels  and  enemies.  Grief,  which  is  opposed  to  it,  arises  from 
the  disobedience  and  the  misery  of  the  creature,  and  in  the 
occasion  thus  given  by  his  people  for  blaspheming  the  name 
of  God  among  the  gentiles.  To  this,  repentance  has  some 
affinity ;  which  is  nothing  more  than  a  change  of  the  thing 
willed  or  done,  on  account  of  the  act  of  a  rational  creature,  or, 
rather,  a  desire  for  such  change. 

XL  I/i  the  irascible  part  are  hope  and  its  opposite,  despair, 
confidence  and  anger,  also  fear,  which  is  affirmatively  opposed 
to  hope.  (1.)  Hope  is  an  [attenta]  earnest  expectation  of  a 
good,  due  from  the  creature,  and  performable  by  the  grace  of 
God.  It  cannot  easily  be  reconciled  with  the  certain  fore- 
knowledge of  God.  (2.)  Despair  arises  from  the  pertinacious 
[malitia]  wickedness  of  the  creature,  opposing  himself  to  the 
grace  of  God,  and  resisting  the  Holy  Spirit.  (3.)  Confidence 
is  that  by  which  God  with  great  [spi7'itu]  animation  prose- 
cutes a  desired  good,  and  repels  an  evil  that  is  hated.  (4.) 
Anger  is  an  affection  of  depulsion  in  God,  through  the  pun- 
ishment of  the  creature  that  has  transgressed  his  law,  by 
which  he  inflicts  on  the  creature  the  evil  of  misery  for  his  un- 
righteousness, and  takes  the  vengeance  which  is  due  to  him, 
as  an  indication  of  his  love  towards  justice,  and  of  his  hatred 
to  sin.  When  this  affection  is  vehement,  it  is  called  "fury." 
(5.)   Fear  is  from  an  impending  evil  to  which  God  is  averse. 

XH.  Of  the  second  class  of  these  derivative  affections, 
(See  Thesis  XI,)  some  belong  to  God  per  se^  as  they  simply 
contain  in  themselves  perfection ;  others,  which  seem  to  have 
something  of  imperfection,  are  attributed  to  him  after  the  man- 
ner of  the  feelings  of  men,  on  account  of  some  effects  [ipsius] 
which  he  produces  analogous  to  the  effects  of  the  creatures, 
yet  without  any  passion,  as  he  is  simple  and  immutable  and 
without  any  disorder  and  repugnance  to  right  reason.  But 
we  subject  the  use  and  exercise  of  the  first  class  of  these  affec- 


48 


JAMES  ARMINTUS. 


tions  (See Thesis  X,)  to  the  infinite  wisdom  of  God,  whose  prop- 
erty it  is  to  prefix  to  each  of  them  its  object,  means,  end  and 
circumstances,  and  to  decree  to  which,  in  preference  to  the  rest, 
is  to  be  conceded  the  province  of  acting. 


DISPUTATION^  XXI. 

ON  THOSE  ATTRIBUTES  OF  GOD  WmCH  HAVE  SOIVIE  ANALOGY  TO 
THE  MORAL  VIRTUES,  AND  WHICH  ACT  LIKE  MODERATORS  OF 
THE  AFFECTIONS,  CONSIDERED  IN  THE  PRECEDING  DISPUTATION. 

I.  EuT  these  attributes  preside  generally  over  all  the  afifec- 
tions,  or  specially  relate  to  some  of  them.  The  general  is  jus- 
tice, or  righteousness,  which  is  called  "universal"  or  "  legal," 
and  concerning  which  it  was  said  by  the  ancients,  that  it  con- 
tains, in  itself,  all  the  virtues.  The  special  are,  particular  jus- 
tice, patience,  and  those  which  are  the  moderators  of  anger, 
and  of  chastisements  and  punishments. 

II.  The  justice  of  God,  considered  universally,  is  a  virtue 
of  God,  according  to  which  he  administers  all  things  correctly 
and  \_deGenteir\  in  a  suitable  manner,  according  to  that  which 
iiis  wisdom  dictates  as  befitting  himself.  In  conjunction  with 
wisdom,  it  presides  over  all  his  acts,  decrees  and  deeds  ;  and 
according  to  it,  God  is  said  to  be  "just  and  right,"  his  way 
"  equal,"  and  himself  to  be  "just  in  all  his  ways." 

III.  The  particular  justice  of  God  is  that  by  w^hich  he  con- 
sistently renders  to  every  one  his  own — to  God  himself  that 
which  is  his,  and  to  the  creature  that  which  belongs  to  itself. 
We  consider  it  both  in  the  words  of  God  and  in  his  deeds.  In 
this,  the  method  of  the  decrees  is  not  different ;  because, 
whatever  God  does  or  says,  he  does  or  says  it  according  to  his 
own  eternal  decree.  This  justice  likewise  contains  a  modera- 
tor partly  of  his  love  for  the  good  of  obedience,  and  partly  of 
his  love  for  the  creature,  and  of  his  goodness. 

lY.  Justice  in  deeds  may  be  considered  in  the  following 
order :  That  the  first  may  be  in  the  communication  of  good, 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


49 


either  according  to  tlie  first  creation,  or  according  to  regenera- 
tion. Ttie  second  is  in  the  prescribing  of  duty,  or  in  legisla- 
tion, which  consists  in  the  requisition  of  a  deed,  and  in  the 
promise  of  a  reward,  and  the  threat  of  a  punish nient.  The 
third  is  in  the  judging  about  deeds,  which  is  retributive,  being 
both  communicative  of  a  reward  and  vindicative.  In  all  these, 
the  magnanimity  of  God  is  to  be  considered.  In  communica- 
tion, in  promise,  and  in  remuneration,  his  liberality  and  mag- 
nificence are  also  to  com.e  under  consideration  ;  and  they  \m\j 
be  appropriately  referred  partly  to  distributive,  and  partly  to 
commutative  justice. 

Y.  Justice  in  words  is  also  three-fold.  (1.)  Truth,  by 
which  he  always  enunciates  or  declares  exactly  as  the  thing 
is,  to  which  is  opposed  falsehood.  (2.)  Sincerity  and  simpli- 
,  city,  by  which  lie  always  declares  as  he  inwardly  conceives, 
according  to  [sensnm  ct ])ro}josituii%\  the  meaning  and  purpose 
of  his  mind,  to  which  are  opposed  hypocrisy  and  duplicity  of 
heart.  And  (3.)  Fidelity,  by  which  he  is  constant  in  keeping 
promises  and  in  \coimnuniGaiionihus\  communicating  privi- 
leges, to  which  are  opposed  inconstancy  and  perfidy. 

VI.  Patience  is  that  by  wdiich  [tohytxinter  sufert']  he  pa- 
tiently endures  the  absence  of  that  God,  tliat  is,  of  the  prescri- 
bed obedience  which  he  loves,  desires,  and  for  which  lie  hopes, 
and  the  presence  of  that  evil  which  he  forbids,  sparing  sinners, 
not  only  that  he  may  execute  [judicia]  the  judicial  acts  of  his 
mercy  and  severity  through  them,  but  that  he  may  also  lead 
them  to  repentance,  or  that  he  may  punish  the  contumacious 
with  greater  equity  and  severity.  And  this  attribute  seems 
to  attemper  the  love  [which  God  entertains]  for  the  good  of 
justice. 

YII.  Long  suffering,  gentleness  or  lenity,  clemency  and 
Ifacilitas']  readiness  to  pardon,  are  the  moderators  of  anger, 
chastisements  and  punishments. 

YIII.  Long  suffering  is  a  virtue  by  which  God  suspends 
bis  anger,  lest  it  should  instantly  hasten  to  the  depulsion  of 
the  evil,  as  soon  as  the  creature  has  by  his  sins  deserved  it. 

IX.  Gentleness  or  lenity  is  a  virtue,  by  which  God  pre- 
serves [mediocritatem]  moderation  concerning  anger  in  taking 


50 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


vengeance,  lest  it  should  be  too  vehement — ^lest  the  seventy 
of  the  anger  should  certainly  correspond  with  the  magnitude 
of  the  wickedness  perpetrated. 

X.  Clemency  is  a  virtue  by  which  God  so  attempers  the 
chastisements  and  punishments  of  the  creature,  even  at  the 
very  time  when  he  inflicts  them,  that,  by  their  weight  and 
continuance,  they  may  not  equal  the  magnitude  of  the  sins 
committed  ;  indeed,  that  they  may  not  exceed  the  strength  of 
the  creature. 

XI.  Readiness  to  forgive  is  a  virtue  by  which  God  shews 
himself  to  be  exorable  to  his  creature,  and  which  fixes  a  meas- 
ure to  the  limits  of  anger,  lest  it  should  endure  for  ever,  agree- 
ably to  the  demerit  of  the  sins  committed. 

COEOLLAKIES. 

Does  the  justice  of  God  permit  him  to  destine  to  death  eter- 
nal,  a  rational  creature  who  has  never  sinned  ?  We  reply  in  the 
negative. 

Does  the  justice  of  God  allow  that  a  creature  should  be 
saved  who  perseveres  in  his  sins  ?  We  reply  in  the  neg- 
ative. 

Cannot  justice  and  mercy,  in  some  accommodated  sense,  be 
considered,  as,  in  a  certain  respect,  opposed?  We  reply  in 
the  affirmative. 


DISPUTATIOIT  XXII. 

ON  THE  POWER  OK  CAPABILITY  OF  GOD. 

I.  When  entering  on  the  consideration  of  the  power  or 
capability  of  God,  as  we  deny  the  passive  power  which  cannot 
[cadere]  belong  to  God  who  is  a  pure  act,  so  we  likewise  omit 
that  which  is  occupied  with  internal  acts  through  necessity  of 
nature  ;  and  at  present  we  exhibit  for  examination  that  power 
alone  which  consists  in  [yi]  the  capacity  of  external  actions. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


51 


and  bj  which  God  not  only  is  capable  of  operating  beyond 
himself,  but  actually  does  operate  whenever  it  is  his  own  good 
pleasuj  e. 

II.  And  it  is  a  faculty  of  the  divine  life,  by  which,  (subse- 
quently to  the  understanding  of  God  that  shews  and  directs, 
and  to  his  will  that  commands,)  he  is  capable  of  operating  ex- 
ternally what  things  soever  he  can  freely  will,  and  by  which 
he  does  operate  whatever  he  freely  wills. 

III.  The  measure  of  the  divine  [potentioe]  capability  is  the 
free  will  of  God,  and  that  is  truly  an  adequate  measure ;  so 
that  the  object  of  the  capability  may  be,  and,  indeed,  ought 
to  be,  circumscribed  and  limited  most  appropriately  from  the 
object  of  the  free  will  of  God.  For,  whatever  cannot  fall 
under  his  will,  cannot  fall  under  his  capability  ;  and  what- 
ever is  subject  to  the  former,  is  likewise  subject  to  the 
latter. 

lY.  But  the  will  of  God  can  only  will  that  which  is  not 
opposed  to  the  divine  essence,  (which  is  the  foundation  both 
of  his  understanding  and  of  his  will,)  that  is,  it  can  will  no- 
thing but  that  which  exists,  is  true  and  good.  Hence,  neither 
can  his  capability  do  any  other.  Again,  since,  under  the 
phrase  "  what  is  not  opposed  to  the  divine  essence,"  is  com- 
prehended whatsoever  is  simply  and  absolutely  possible,  and 
since  God  can  w^ili  the  whole  of  this,  it  follows  that  God 
\^2^osse]  is  capable  of  every  thing  which  is  possible. 

Y.  Those  things  are  imposible  to  God  which  involve  a  con- 
tradiction, as,  to  make  another  God,  to  be  mutable,  to  sin, 
to  lie,  to  cause  some  thing  at  once  to  be  and  not  to  be,  to  have 
been  and  not  to  have  been,  &c.,  that  this  thing  should  be  and 
not  be,  that  it  and  its  contrary  should  be,  that  an  accident 
should  be  without  its  subject,  that  a  substance  should  be 
changed  into  a  pre-existing  substance,  bread  into  the  body  of 
Christ,  that  a  body  should  possess  ubiquity,  &c.  These  things 
partly  belong  \imj)otentioB\  to  a  want  of  jpower  to  be  capable 
of  doing  them,  and  partly  to  insanity  to  will  to  do  them. 

YI.  But  \^'potentid\  the  capability  of  God  is  infinite — and 
this  not  only  hecause  it  can  do  all  things  possihle^  which,  in- 
deed, are  innumerable,  so  that  as  many  canno|jtbe  enumerated 

m 


53 


JAMES  ARMINIUa. 


as  it  is  capable  of  doing,  [or  after  all  that  can  be  numbered,  it 
is  capable  of  doing  still  mor^];  nor  can  sucli  great  things 
[po?idera/i]  be  calculated  without  its  being  able  to  produce  far 
greater,  but  likewise  because  nolJdvg  can  resist  it.  For  all 
created  things  depend  upon  him,  as  upon  the  efficient  princi- 
ple, both  in  their  being  and  in  their  preservation.  Hence, 
omnipotence  is  justly  ascribed  to  him. 

YII.   This  can  be  communicated  to  no  creature. 


DISPUTATION  XXIII. 

ON  THE  PEEFECTIOX.  BLESSEDNESS  AND  GLOKY  OE  GOD. 

I.  l^EXT  in  order,  follows  the  perfection  of  God,  resulting 
from  the  simple  and  infinite  [comjjlexu]  circuit  of  all  those 
things  wliich  we  have  already  attributed  to  God,  and  consid- 
ered with  the  mode  of  pre-eminence — not  that  perfection  by 
which  he  has  everj^  individual  thing  most  perfectly,  (for  this 
[2^^cesHtsnmt]  is  the  office  of  simplicity  and  infinity,)  but 
that  by  which  he  has  all  things  simply  denoting  some  perfec- 
tion in  the  most  perfect  manner.  And  it  maybe  appropriate- 
ly described  thus  :  It  is  the  interminable,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  the  entire  and  perfect  possession  of  essence  and  life. 

II.  And  this  perfection  of  God  infinitely  transcends  every 
created  perfection,  in  three  several  waj^s  :  (1.)  Because  it  has 
all  things.  (2.)  It  has  tliem  in  a  manner  the  most  perfect. 
And  (3.)  It  does  not  derive  them  from  any  other  source.  But 
as  the  creatures  have,  through  participation,  a  perfection  from 
God,  faintly  shadowed  forth  after  its  archetype,  so,  of  conse- 
quence, they  neither  have  every  perfection,  nor  in  a  manner 
the  most  ]")erfect ;  yet  some  creatures  have  a  greater  perfection 
than  others ;  and  the  more  of  it  they  j)0ssess,  the  nearer  are 
they  to  God,  and  the  more  like  him. 

III.  From  this  perfection  of  God,  by  means  of  some  inter- 
nal act,  his  blessedness  has  its  existence  ;  and  by  means  of 
Bome  [resj)eGlu]  relation  of  it  ad  extra^  his  glory  exists. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


53 


IT.  Blessedness  is  an  act  of  God,  by  wliicli  be  enjoys  bis 
own  perfection,  that  is  fully  known  by  bis  understanding,  and 
supremely  loved  by  bis  will,  witb  \_acquiescentia\  adeligbtful 
satisfaction  in  it.  It  is,  tberefore,  tbroiigb  the  act  of  tbe  un- 
derstanding, and  of  tbe  will ;  of  tbe  understanding,  indeed, 
[attingentis]  reacbing  to  tbe  essence  of  tbe  object,  but  tbe  act 
of  wbicb  would  not  be  an  act  of  felicity,  unless  it  bad  tbis, 
its  heing  an  act  of  fdicicity^  from  tbe  will  wbicb  perpetually 
desires  [intiiitiirri]  to  bebold  tbe  beatified  object,  and  is  de- 
ligbtfully  satisfied  in  it. 

Y.  But  tbis  blessedness  is  so  peculiar  to  God  tbat  it  cannot 
be  communicated  to  any  creature.  Yet  be  is,  bimself,  with 
respect  to  tbe  object,  tbe  beatified  good  of  creatures  endow- 
ed witb  understanding,  and  tbe  effector  of  the  act  wbicb  tends 
to  the  effect,  and  wbicb  is  delightfully  satisfied  in  it.  Of 
these,  consists  the  blessedness  of  the  creature. 

YI.  Glory  is  tbe  divine  excellence  above  all  things,  wbicb 
he  makes  manliest  by  external  acts,  in  various  ways. 

YII.  But  the  modes  of  manifestation,  wbicb  are  declared 
to  us  in  the  Scriptures,  are  principally  two — tbe  ono',  by  an 
effulgence  of  unusual  light  ;  nd  splendor,  or  by  tbe  opposite 
to  it,  a  dense  darkness  and  obscurity  ;  tbe  other,  by  the  pro- 
duction of  works  wbicb  agree  witb  bis  perfection  and  excel- 
lence. 

,  YIII.  Tbis  description  of  the  divine  nature  is  the  first  foun- 
dation of  all  religion.  For  it  is  concluded,  from  tbis  perfec- 
tion  and  blessedness  of  Gud,  tbat  tbe  act  of  religion  can  be 
worthily  and  usefully  exhibited  to  God,  to  the  knowledge  of 
wbicb  matter,  we  are  brought,  through  tbe  manifestation  of 
the  divine  glory. 

The  candid  reader  will  he  ahle^  in  this  place^  to  siijpfly 
from  the  'preceding  jmhlic  dujmtations^  thti  theses  on  the 
Father  and  the  Son^  and  those  on  the  Holy  Sjjirity  the  Holy  and 
undivided  Trinity. 


54 


JAMES  AEMTNTUS. 


DISPUTATION^  XXIY. 

ON  CREATION. 

I.  "We  have  treated  on  God,  who  is  the  first  object  of  the 
Christian  religion.  And  we  would  now  treat  on  CimisT,  who, 
next  to  God,  is  another  object  of  the  same  religion ;  but  we 
must  premise  some  things,  without  which,  Christ  would  nei- 
ther be  an  object  of  religion,  nor  would  the  necessity  of  the 

.  Christian  religion  be  understood.  Indeed,  the  cause  must  be 
FIRST  explained,  on  account  of  which  God  has  a  right  to  re- 
quire any  religion  from  man  ;  then  the  religion,  also,  that  is 
prescribed  in  virtue  of  this  cause  and  right,  and,  lastly,  the 
event  ensuing,  from  which  has  arisen  the  necessity  of  consti- 
tuting Christ  our  Savior,  and  the  Christian  religion,  employed 
by  God,  through  his  own  will,  who  hath  not,  by  the  sin  of  man, 
lost  his  right  which  he  obtains  over  him  by  creation,  nor  has 
he  entirely  laid  aside  his  affection  for  man,  though  a  sinner, 
and  miserable. 

II.  And  since  God  is  the  object  of  the  Christian  religion, 
not  only  as  the  Creator,  but  likewise  as  \_IleGTeato)'\  the  Crea- 
tor anew,  (in  which  latter  respect,  Christ,  also,  as  constituted 
by  God  to  be  the  Savior,  is  the  object  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion,) it  is  necessary  for  us  first  to  treat  about  the  primi- 
tive creation,  and  those  things  which  are  joined  to  it  accord- 
ing to  nature,  and,  after  that,  about  those  which  resulted  from 
\^faGt6\  the  conduct  of  man,  before  we  begin  to  treat  on  the 
new  creation,  in  which  the  primary  consideration  is  that  of 
Christ  as  Mediator. 

III.  Creation  is  an  external  act  of  God,  by  which  he  pro- 
duced all  things  out  of  nothing,  {^jprajpterl  for  himself,  by  his 
Word  and  Spirit. 

lY.  The  primary  eflficient  cause  is  God  the  Father,  by  his 
Word  and  Spirit.  The  impelling  cause,  which  we  have  indi- 
cated in  the  definition  by  the  particle  "/(^r,"  is  the  goodness 
of  God,  according  to  which  he  is  \a;ffectus\  inclined  to  com- 
municate his  good.   The  ordainer  is  the  divine  wisdom  ;  and 


TRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


55 


the  executrix,  or  performer,  is  the  divine  power,  which  the 
will  of  God  employs  through  [affectu]  an  inclination  of  good- 
ness, according  to  the  most  equitable  prescript  of  his  wisdom. 

Y.  The  matter  from  which  God  created  all  things,  must  be 
considered  in  three  forms  :  (1.)  The  first  of  all  is  that  from 
which  all  things  in  general  were  produced,  into  which,  also, 
they  may  all,  on  this  account,  relapse  and  be  reduced  ;  it  is 
NOTHING  ITSELF,  that  our  Hiind,  by  the  removal  of  all  entity, 
considers  as  the  first  matter  ;  for,  that,  alone,  is  capable  of  the 
first  communication  of  God  ad  extra  ^  because,  God  ^vould 
neither  have  the  right  to  introduce  his  own  form  into  matter 
coeval  [with  himself],  nor  would  he  be  capable  of  acting,  as 
it  would  then  be  eternal  matter,  and,  therefore,  obnoxious  to 
no  change.  (2.)  The  second  matter  is  that  from  which  all 
things  corporeal  are  now  distinguished,  according  to  their 
own  separate  forms  ;  and  this  is  the  rude  chaos  and  indigested 
mass  created  [aJ)]  at  the  beginning.  (3.)  The  third  consists 
both  of  these  simple  and  secret  elements,  and  of  certain  com- 
pound bodies,  from  which  all  the  rest  have  been  produced,  as 
from  the  waters  have  proceeded  creeping  and  flying  things, 
and  fishes — from  the  earth,  all  other  living  things,  trees,  herbs 
and  shrubS' — from  the  rib  of  Adam,  the  woman,  and  from 
seeds,  the  perpetuation  of  the  species. 

YI.  The  form  is  the  production  itself  of  all  things  out  of 
nothing,  which  form  pre  existed  ready  framed,  according  to 
the  archetype  in  the  mind  of  God,  without  any  proper  entity, 
lest  any  one  should  feign  an  ideal  world. 

YII.  From  an  inspection  of  the  matter  and  form,  it  is  evi- 
dent, FIRST,  that  creation  is  the  immediate  act  of  God,  alone, 
both  because  a  creature,  who  is  of  a  finite  \yirtutis]  power  is 
incapable  of  operating  on  nothing,  and  because  such  a  crea- 
ture cannot  shape  matter  in  substantial  forms.  Secondly. 
The  creation  was  freely  produced,  not  necessarily,  because 
God  was  neither  bound  to  nothing,  nor  destitute  of  forms. 

YIII.  The  end — not  that  which  moved  God  to  create,  for 
God  is  not  moved  by  any  thing  external,  but  that  which  in- 
cessantly and  immediately  results  from  the  very  act  of  crea- 
tion, and  which  is,  in  fact,  contained  in  the  essence  of  this  act 


66 


JAMES  ARMnmJS. 


— tins  end  is  the  demonstration  of  the  divine  wisdom,  good- 
ness and  puwer.  For  those  divine  properties  wliich  concur  to 
act,  shine  forth  and  show  themselves  in  their  own  nature  in 
action — goodness,  in  the  very  communication — wisdom,  in  the 
mode,  order  and  variety— and  power,  in  this  circumstance, 
that  so  many  and  such  great  things  are  produced  out  of  no- 
thing. 

IX.  The  end,  which  is  called  [cui]  "  to  what  purpose,"  is 
the  good  of  the  creatures  themselves,  and  especially  of  man, 
to  whom  are  referred  most  other  creatures,  as  being  useful  to 
Jiira,  according  to  the  institution  of  the  divine  creation. 

X.  The  effect  of  creation  is  this  universal  world,  which,  in 
the  Scriptures,  ohtains  the  names  of  the  heaven  and  the  earthy 
sometimes,  also,  of  the  sea^  as  being  the  extremities  within 
which  all  things  are  embraced.  This  world  is  an  entire  some- 
thing, which  is  perfect  and  [absolutinii]  complete,  having  no 
defect,  of  any  form,  that  can  bear  relation  to  the  whole  or  to 
its  parts  ;  nor  is  redundant  in  any  form  which  has  no  relation 
to  the  whole  and  its  parts.  It  is,  also,  [unum  quid]  a  single, 
or  a  united  something,  not  by  an  indivisible  unity,  but  accord- 
ino"  to  connection  and  co-ordination,  and  the  affection  of  mu- 
tual relation,  consisting  of  parts  distinguished,  not  only  ao- 
cording  to  place  and  situation,  but  likewise  according  to  nature, 
essence  and  peculi-ir  existence.  This  was  necessary,  not  only 
to  adumbrats,  in  some  measure,  the  perfection  of  God  in  va- 
riety and  multitude,  but  also  to  demonstrate  that  the  Lord 
omnipotent  did  not  create  the  world  by  a  natural  necessity, 
but  by  the  freedom  of  his  will. 

XI.  But  this  entire  universe  is,  according  to  the  Si'r'ptiires, 
distributed  in  the  best  manner  possible  into  three  classes  of 
objects,  (1.)  Into  creatures  purely  spiritual  and  invisible;  of 
this  class  are  the  angels.  (2.)  Into  creatures  merely  corporeal. 
And  (3.)  Into  creatures  that  are,  in  one  part  of  them,  corpo- 
real and  visible,  and  in  another  part,  spiritual  and  invisible; 
men  are  of  this  last  class. 

XII.  We  think  tliis  was  the  order  observed  in  creation  : 
Spiritual  creatures,  that  is,  the  angels,  were  first  created.  Cor- 
poreal creatures  were  next  created,  according  to  the  series  of 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


57 


six  days,  not  together  and  in  a  single  moment.  Lastly,  man 
was  created,  consisting  both  of  body  and  spirit :  his  body  was, 
indeed,  first  formed  ;  and  afterwards  his  sonl  was  inspired  by 
creating,  and  created  by  inspiring;  that  as  God  commenced 
the  creation  in  a  spirit,  so  he  might  finish  it  on  a  spirit,  being 
himself  [immeiisus]  the  immeasurable  and  eternal  Spirit. 

XIIL  This  creation  is  the  foundation  of  that  right  by  which 
God  can  require  religion  from  man,  which  is  a  matter  that 
will  be  more  certainly  and  fully  understood,  when  we  come 
more  specially  to  treat  on  the  primeval  creation  of  man  ;  for  he 
who  is  not  the  creator  of  all  things,  and  who,  therefore,  has 
not  all  things  under  his  command,  cannot  be  believed,  neither 
can  any  sure  hope  and  confidence  be  placed  in  him,  nor  can 
he  alone  be  feared.  Yet  all  these  are  acts  which  belong  to 
religion. 

COROLLARIES. 

I.  The  world  was  neither  created  from  all  eternity,  nor 
could  it  be  so  created ;  though  God  was,  from  eternity,  fur- 
nished with  that  [potentia]  capability  by  which  he  could 
create  the  world,  and  afterwards  did  create  it ;  and  though  no 
moment  of  time  can  be  conceived  by  us,  in  which  the  world 
could  not  have  been  created. 

II.  He  who  forms  an  accurate  conception,  in  his  mind,  of 
creation,  must,  in  addition  to  the  plenitude  of  divine  wisdom, 
goodness  and  power,  or  capability,  conceive  that  there  was  a 
two -fold  privation  or  vacuity — the  first,  according  to  essence 
or  form^  which  will  bear  some  resemblance  to  an  infinite  no- 
thing that  is  capable  of  infinite  forms  ;  the  second,  according 
to  place,  which  will  be  like  an  infinite  vacuum  that  is  capable 
of  being  the  receptacle  of  numerous  worlds. 

III.  Hence,  this,  also,  follows,  that  time  and  place  are  not 
separate  creatures,  but  are  created  with  things  themselves,  or, 
rather,  that  they  exist  together  at  the  creation  of  things,  not 
by  an  absolute  but  a  relative  entity,  without  which  no  created 
thing  can  be  thought  upon  or  conceived. 

5  VOL.  II. 


58 


JAMES  AEMINnJS. 


lY.  This  creation  is  the  first  of  all  the  divine  external  acts, 
both  in  the  intention  of  the  Creator,  and  actually  or  in  reali- 
ty ;  and  it  is  an  act  perfect  in  itself,  not  serving  another  [prin- 
cipaliori]  more  primary  one,  as  its  medium  ;  though  God  has 
made  some  creatures,  which,  in  addition  to  the  fact  of  their 
having  been  made  by  the  act  of  creation,  are  fitted  to  be  ad- 
vanced still  further,  and  to  be  elevated  to  a  condition  yet  more 
excellent. 

Y.  If  any  thing  be  represented  as  the  object  of  creation,  it 
seems  that  nothing  can  be  laid  down  more  suitably  than  those 
things  which,  out  of  all  things  possible,  have,  by  the  act  of 
creation,  been  produced  from  non-existence  into  existence. 


DISPUTATIOIS"  XXY. 

ON  ANGELS  IN   GENEEAL  AND  IN  PAETICULAE. 

I.  Angels  are  [substantice]  substances  merely  spiritual,  cre- 
ated after  the  image  of  God,  not  only  that  they  might  ac- 
knowledge, love  and  worship  their  Creator,  and  might  live  in 
a  state  of  happiness  with  him,  but  that  they  might  likewise 
perform  certain  duties  concerning  the  rest  of  the  creatures  ac- 
cording to  the  command  of  God. 

II.  We  call  them  "substances,"  against  the  Sadducees 
and  others,  who  contend  that  angels  are  nothing  more  than 
the  good  or  the  evil  motions  of  spirits,  or  else  exercises  of 
power  to  aid  or  to  injure.  But  this  is  completely  at  variance 
with  the  whole  Scripture,  as  the  actions,  (which  are  those  of 
supposititious  beings,)  the  appearances,  and  the  names  which 
they  ascribe  to  them,  more  than  sufficiently  demonstrate. 

III.  We  add  that  they  are  "  merely  spiritual,"  that  we  may 
separate  them  from  men,  the  species  opposite  to  them,  and 
may  intimate  their  nature.    And  though  composition  out  of 

'  matter  and  form  [non  cadit,  is  not  an  accident,  or]  does  not 
belong  to  angels,  yet,  we  affirm  that  they  are  absolutely  com- 


PKIVAITE  DISPUTATIONS. 


59 


pound  substances,  and  that  they  are  composed,  (1.)  Of  being 
and  essence.  (2.)  Of  act  and  power,  or  capability.  (3.)  Lastly, 
of  subject  and  inhering  accident. 

lY.  But  because  they  are  creatures,  they  are  finite,  and  we 
measure  them  by  place,  time,  and  number.  (1.)  By  place, 
not  that  they  are  in  it  corporeally,  that  is,  not  that  they  occu- 
py and  fill  up  a  certain  local  space,  commensurate  with  their 
substance  ;  but  they  are  in  it  intellectually,  that  is,  they  exist 
in  a  place  without  the  occupying  and  repletion  of  any  local 
space,  which  the  schoolmen  denominate  [definitive]  by  way 
of  definition,  "  to  be  in  a  place."  But,  as  they  cannot  be  in 
several  places  at  once,  but  are  sometimes  in  one  place,  and 
sometimes  in  another,  so  they  are  not  moved  without  time, 
though  it  is  scarcely  perceptible.  (2.)  We  measure  them  by 
TIME,  or  by  duration  or  age,  because  they  have  a  commence- 
ment of  being,  and  the  whole  age  in  which  [dwent]  they  con- 
tinue they  have  in  succession,  by  parts  of  past,  present  and 
future ;  but  the  whole  of  it  is  not  present  to  them  at  the  same 
moment  and  [indistanter]  without  any  distance.  (3.)  Lastly. 
We  measure  them  by  number,  though  tliis  number  is  not  de- 
fined in  the  pages  of  the  sacred  volume,  and,  therefore,  is  un- 
known to  us,  but  known  to  God  ;  3^et  it  is  very  great,  for  it  is 
neither  diminished  nor  increased,  because  the  angels  [gene- 
rentur]  are  neither  begotten  nor  die. 

Y.  We  say  that  they  v/ere  "  created  after  the  image  of  God 
for  they  are  denominated  "  the  sons  of  God."  This  image,  we 
say,  consists  partly  in  those  things  which  belong  to  their  na- 
tures, and  partly  in  those  things  which  are  of  supernatural  en- 
dowment. (1.)  To  their  nature^  belong  both  their  spiritual 
essence,  and  the  faculty  of  understanding,  of  willing,  and  of 
powerfully  acting.  (2.)  To  supernatural  endowment^  belong 
the  light  of  knowledge  in  the  understanding,  and,  following 
it,  the  lectitude  or  holiness  ol  the  will.  Immortality  itself,  is 
of  supernatural  endowment ;  but  it  is  that  which  God  has  de- 
termined to  preserve  to  them,  in  what  manner  soever  they 
may  conduct  themselves  towards  him. 

YI.  The  end  subjoined  is  two-fold — that,  standing  around 
the  throne  of  God  as  his  apparitors  or  messengers,  for  the 


60 


JAMES  AHMINIUS. 


glory  of  tlie  divine  Majesty,  the  angels  may  perpetually  land 
and  celebrate  [the  praises  of]  God,  and  that  they  may,  with 
the  utmost  swiftness,  execute,  at  the  beck  of  God,  the  offices 
of  ministration  which  he  enjoins  upon  them. 

YII.  We  are  informed  in  the  Scriptures  themselves,  that 
there  is  a  certain  order  among  angels  ;  for  they  mention  an- 
gels and  archangels,  and  attribute  even  to  the  devil  his  an- 
gels. But  we  are  willingly  ignorant  of  that  distinction  into 
orders  and  various  degrees,  and  what  it  is  which  constitutes 
such  distinction.  We  also  think  that  if  [the  existence  of] 
certain  orders  of  angels  be  granted,  it  is  more  probable  that 
God  employs  angels  of  different  orders  for  the  same  [ministe- 
ria]  duties,  than  that  he  appoints  distinct  orders  to  each  sepa- 
rate ministry ;  though  we  allow  that  those  who  hold  othe 
sentiments,  think  so  with  some  reason. 

YIII.  For  the  ^performance  of  the  ministries  enjoined  on 
them,  angels  have  frequently  appeared  clothed  in  bodies, 
which  bodies  they  have  not  formed  and  assumed  to  themselves 
out  of  nothing,  but  out  of  pre-existing  matter,  by  a  union  nei- 
ther essential  nor  personal,  but  local,  (because  they  were  no 
then  beyond  those  bodies,)  and,  according  to  an  instrumental 
[rationem]  purpose,  that  they  might  use  them  for  the  due  per- 
formance of  the  acts  enjoined. 

IX.  These  bodies,  therefore,  have  neither  been  alive,  nor 
have  the  angels,  through  them,  seen,  heard,  tasted,  smelled, 
touched,  conceived  phantasms  or  imaginations,  &c.  But, 
through  the  organs  of  these  bodies,  they  produced  only  such 
acts  as  could  be  performed  by  an  angel  inhabiting  them,  or, 
rather,  existing  in  them,  as  the  mover  according  to  j)lace.  On 
this  account,  perhaps,  it  is  not  improperly  affirmed,  that  bod» 
ies,  truly  human,  which  are  inhabited  by  a  living  and  \infoT- 
mans^  shaping,  or]  directing  spirit,  can  be  discerned,  by  hu- 
man judgment,  from  these  assumed  bodies. 

X.  God  likewise  prescribed  a  certain  law  to  angels,  by 
which  they  might  order  their  life  according  to  God,  and  not 
according  to  themselves,  and  by  the  observance  of  which  they 
might  be  blessed,  or,  by  transgressing  it,  might  be  eternally 
miserable,  without  any  hope  of  pardon.    For  it  was  the  good 


PBIVATE  DISPUTATION'S. 


61 


pleasure  of  God  to  act  towards  angels  according  to  strict  jus- 
tice, and  not  \exj[iliGar(i\  to  display  all  liis  goodness  in  bring- 
ing tliem  to  salvation. 

XI.  But  we  do  not  decide  whether  a  single  act  of  obedience 
was  [{7npetratorius]  sufficient  to  obtain  eternal  blessedness, 
as  one  act  of  disobedience  was  deserving  of  eternal  destruc- 
tion. 

XII.  Some  of  the  angels  transgressed  the  law  under  which 
they  were  placed ;  and  this  they  did  by  their  own  fault,  be- 
cause by  that  grace  with  which  they  were  furnished,  and  by 
which  God  assisted  them,  and  was  prepared  to  assist  them, 
they  were  enabled  to  obey  the  law,  and  to  remain  in  their  in- 
tegrity. 

XIII.  Hence,  is  the  division  made  of  angels  into  the  good 
and  the  evil.  The  former  are  so  denominated,  because  they 
continued  steadfast  in  the  truth,  and  preserved  "  their  own 
habitation."  But  the  latter  are  called  "  evil  angels,"  because 
they  did  not  continue  in  the  truth,  and  "  deserted  their  own 
habitation." 

XIY.  But  the  former  are  called  "  good  angels,"  not  only 
according  to  an  infused  habit,  but  likewise  according  to  the 
act  which  they  performed,  and  according  to  their  confirmation 
in  habitual  goodness,  the  cause  of  which  we  place  in  the  in- 
crease of  grace,  and  in  their  holy  purpose,  which  they  con- 
ceived partly  through  [intuitu']  beholding  the  punishment 
which  was  inflicted  on  the  apostate  angels,  and  partly  through 
[sensu]  the  perception  of  increased  grace.  [If  it  be  asked,] 
Did  they  not  also  do  this,  through  perfect  blessedness,  to 
which  nothing  could  be  added  ?,  we  do  not  deny  it,  on  account 
of  the  agreement  of  learned  men,  though  it  seems  possible  to 
produce  reasons  to  the  contrary. 

XY.  The  latter  (Thesis  XIII,)  are  called  "  evil  angels," 
FiEST,  by  actual  [malitia]  wickedness,  and  then,  by  habitual 
wickedness  and  pertinacious  obstinacy  in  it ;  hence,  they  take 
a  delight  in  doing  whatever  they  suppose  can  tend  to  the  re- 
proach of  God  and  the  destruction  of  their  neighbor.  But 
this  fixed  obstinacy  in  evil  seems  to  derive  its  origin  partly 
from  an  intuition  of  the  wrath  of  God  and  from  an  evil  con- 


62 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


science  whicli  springs  out  of  that,  and  partly  from  their  own 
wickedness. 

XYI.  But,  concerning  the  species  of  sin  which  the  angels 
perpetrated,  we  dare  not  assert  what  it  was.  Yet  we  say,  it 
may  with  some  probability  be  affirmed,  that  it  was  the  crime 
of  pride,  from  that  argument  which  solicited  man  to  sin 
through  the  desire  of  excellence. 

XYII.  When  it  is  the  will  of  God  to  employ  [op^m]  the 
assistance  of  good  angels,  he  may  be  said  to  employ  not  only 
those  powers  and  fiiculties  which  he  has  conferred  on  them, 
but  likewise  those  whicli  are  augmented  by  himself.  But  we 
think  it  is  contradictory  to  truth,  if  God  be  said  to  furnish  the 
devils,  whose  service  he  uses,  with  greater  knowledge  and 
power  than  they  have  through  creation  and  their  own  experi- 
ence. 

COROLLARIES. 

I.  We  allow  this  to  become  a  subject  of  discussion  :  Can 
good  angels  be  said  sometimes  to  contend  among  themselves, 
with  \_salvd]  a  reservation  of  that  charity  which  they  owe  to 
God,  to  each  other,  and  to  men  ? 

II.  Do  angels  need  a  mediator  ?  and  is  Christ  the  media- 
tor of  angels  ?    We  reply  in  the  negative. 

III.  Are  all  angels  of  one  species  ?  We  think  this  to  be 
more  probable  than  its  contrary. 


DISPUTATION  XXYI. 

ON  THE  CREATION  OF  MAN  AFTER  THE  IMAGE  OF  GOD. 

I.  Man  is  a  creature  of  God ;  consisting  of  a  body  and  a 
soul,  rational,  good,  and  created  after  the  divine  image — ac- 
cording to  his  body,  created  from  pre-existing  matter,  that  is, 
earth  [perfusa]  mixed  and  besprinkled  with  aqueous  and 
ethereal  moisture, — according  to  his  soul,  created  out  of  no- 
thing, by  the  breathing  [spiritus]  of  breath  into  his  nostrils. 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


63 


n.  But  that  body  would  have  been  incorruptible,  and,  by 
the  grace  of  God,  would  not  have  been  liable  to  death,  if  man 
had  not  sinned,  and  had  not,  by  that  deed,  procured  for  him- 
self the  necessity  of  dying.  And  because  it  was  to  be  the 
future  receptacle  of  the  soul,  it  was  furnished  by  the  wise 
Creator  with  various  and  excellent  organs. 

III.  But  the  soul  is  entirely  of  an  admirable  nature,  if  you 
consider  its  origin,  substance,  faculties,  and  habits.  (1.)  Its 
origin  ;  for  it  is  from  nothing,  created  by  infusion,  and  in- 
fused by  creation,  a  body  being  duly  prepared  for  its  recep- 
tion, that  it  [informaret]  might  fashion  matter  as  with  form, 
and,  being  united  to  the  body  by  a  native  bond,  might, 
with  it,  compose  one  u(pjraiX£vov,  production.  Created,  I  say, 
by  God  in  time,  as  he  still  daily  creates  a  new  soul  in  each 
body. 

lY.  (2.)  Its  substance^  which  is  simple,  immaterial,  and 
immortal.  Simple,  I  say,  not  with  respect  to  God  ;  for  it  con- 
sists of  act  and  power  or  capability,  of  being  and  essence, 
of  subject  and  accidents  ;  but  it  is  simple  with  resjpect  to 
material  and  comjpotmd  things.  It  is  immaterial,  because 
it  can  subsist  by  itself,  and,  when  separated  from  the  body, 
can  operate  alone.  It  is  immortal,  not  indeed  from  itself, 
but  by  the  sustaining  grace  of  God. 

y.  (3.)  Its  fuculties^  which  are  two,  the  understanding  and 
the  will,  as  in  fact  the  object  of  the  soul  is  two-fold.  For  the 
understanding  apprehends  eternity  and  truth  both  universal 
and  particular,  by  a  natural  and  necessary,  and  therefore  by 
a  uniform  act.  But  the  will  [propendef]  has  an  inclination  to 
good.  Yet  this  is  either,  according  to  the  mode  of  its  nature, 
to  universal  good  and  to  that  which  is  the  chief  good  ;  or,  ac- 
cording to  the  mode  of  liberty,  to  all  other  [kinds  of]  good. 

YI.  (4.)  Lastly.  In  its  habits^  which  are,  fiest,  wisdom, 
by  which  the  intellect  clearly  and  sufficiently  understood  the 
supernatural  truth  and  goodness  both  of  felicity  and  of  righte- 
ousness. Secondly.  Eighteousness  and  the  holiness  of  truth, 
by  which  the  will  was  \aj}ta\  fitted  and  ready  to  follow  what 
this  wisdom  commanded  to  be  done,  and  what  it  shewed  to  be 


64 


JAMES  AJJMINITJS. 


desired.  This  rigliteousness  and  wisdom  are  called  "  original," 
both  because  man  had  them  from  his  very  origin,  and  be- 
cause, if  man  had  continued  in  his  integrity,  they  would  also 
have  been  communicated  to  his  posterity. 

YII.  In  all  these  things,  the  image  of  God  most  wonder- 
fully shone  forth.  We  say  that  this  is  [similitudo]  the  like- 
ness by  which  man  resembled  his  Creator,  and  expressed  it 
according  to  the  mode  of  his  capacity' — 'in  his  soul^  according 
to  its  substance,  faculties  and  habits — in  this  hody^  though  this 
cannot  be  properly  said  to  have  been  created  after  the  image 
of  God  who  is  pure  spirit,  yet  it  is  something  divine,  both  from 
the  circumstance  that,  if  man  had  not  sinned,  his  body  would 
never  have  died,  and  because  it  is  capable  of  special  incorrupt- 
ibility and  glory,  of  which  the  apostle  treats  in  1  Cor.  xv,  be  • 
cause  it  displays  some  excellence  and  majesty  beyond  the 
bodies  of  other  living  creatures,  and,  lastly,  because  it  is  an 
instrument  well  fitted  for  admirable  actions  and  operations — 
in  his  whole  'person^  according  to  the  excellence,  integrity, 
and  the  dominion  over  the  rest  of  the  creatures,  which  were 
conferred  upon  him. 

YIII.  The  parts  of  this  image  may  be  thus  distinguished  : 
Some  of  them  may  be  called  natural  to  man,  and  others  super- 
natural ;  some,  essential  to  him,  and  others  accidental.  It  is 
natural  and  essential  to  the  soul  to  be  a  spirit,  and  to  be  en- 
dowed with  the  power  of  understanding  and  of  willing,  both 
according  to  nature  and  the  mode  of  liberty.  But  the  knowl- 
edge of  God,  and  of  thiugs  pertaining  to  eternal  salvation,  is 
supernatural  and  accidental,  as  are  likewise  the  rectitude  and 
holiness  of  the  will,  according  to  that  knowledge.  Immortal- 
ity is  so  far  essential  to  the  soul,  that  it  cannot  die  unless  it 
cease  to  be ;  but  it  is  on  this  account  supernatural  and  acci- 
dental^ because  it  is  through  grace  and  the  aid  of  preserva- 
tion, which  God  is  not  bound  to  bestow  on  the  soul. 

IX.  But  the  immortality  of  the  body  is  entirely  supernatu- 
ral and  accidental ;  for  it  can  be  taken  away  from  the  body, 
and  the  body  can  return  to  the  dost,  from  which  it  was  taken. 
Its  excellence  above  other  living  creatures,  and  its  peculiar  fit- 
ness to  produce  various  effects,  are  natural  to  it,  and  essential. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


65 


Its  dominion  over  tlie  creatures  wliicli  belongs  to  the  whole 
man  as  consisting  of  body  and  soul,  may  be  partly  considered 
as  belonging  to  it  according  to  the  excellence  of  nature,  and 
partly  as  conferred  upon  it  by  gracious  gift,  of  which  domin- 
ion this  seems  to  be  [signum~\  an  evidence,  that  it  is  never 
taken  wholly  away  from  the  soul,  although  it  be  varied,  and 
be  augmented  and  diininished  according  to  degrees  and 
parts. 

X.  Thus  was  man  created,  that  he  might  know,  love  and 
worship  his  Creator,  and  might  live  with  him  for  ever  in  a 
state  of  blessedness.  By  this  act  of  creation,  God  most 
manifestly  displayed  the  glory  of  his  wisdom,  goodness  and 
power. 

XI.  From  this  description  of  man,  it  appears,  that  he  is 
both  fitted  to  perform  the  act  of  religion  to  God,  since 
such  an  act  is  required  from  him — that  he  is  capable  of 
the  reward  which  may  \decenter  ohtingere]  be  properly  ad- 
judged to  those  who  perform  [acts  of]  religion  to  God,  and  of 
the  pimishment  which  may  be  justly  inflicted  on  those  who 
neglect  religion  ;  and  therefore  that  religion  may,  by  a  deserv- 
ed right,  be  required  from  man  according  to  this  relation  ;  and 
this  is  the  principal  [respeGtus]  relation,  according  to  which 
we  must,  in  sacred  theology,  treat  about  the  creation  of  man 
after  the  image  of  God. 

XII.  In  addition  to  this  image  of  God,  and  this  reference 
to  supernatural  and  spiritual  things,  comes  under  our  consid- 
eration the  state  [v{ta3  animalis]  of  the  natural  life,  in  which 
the  first  man  was  created  and  constituted,  according  to  the 
apostle  Paul,  "  that  which  is  natural  was  first,  and  afterwards, 
that  w^hich  is  spiritual."  (1  Cor.  xv,  46.)  This  state  is  found- 
ed in  the  natural  union  of  body  and  soul,  and  in  the  life  which 
the  soul  naturally  lives  in  the  body  ;  from  which  union  and 
life  it  is  that  the  soul  procures  for  its  body,  things  which  are 
good  for  it ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  body  is  ready  for 
offices  which  are  congruous  to  its  nature  and  desires.  Ac- 
cording to  this  state  or  condition,  there  is  a  mutual  relation 
between  man  and  the  good  things  of  this  world,  the  effect  of 


66 


JAMES  AEMnmjS. 


which  is,  that  man  can  desire  them,  and,  in  procm'ing  them 
for  himself,  can  bestow  that  labor  which  he  deems  to  be  ne- 
cessary and  convenient. 


DISPUTATION  XXYn. 

ON  THE  LOEDSHIP  OE  DOMINION  OF  GOD. 

I.  Theough  creation,  dominion  over  all  things  which  have 
been  created  by  himself,  belongs  to  the  Creator.  It  is,  there- 
fore, primary,  being  dependent  on  no  other  dominion  or  on 
that  of  no  other  person ;  and  it  is,  on  this  account,  chief,  be- 
cause there  is  none  greater ;  and  it  is  absolute,  because  it  is 
over  the  entire  creature,  according  to  the  whole,  and  accord- 
ing to  all  and  each  of  its  parts,  and  to  all  the  relations  which 
subsist  between  the  Creator  and  the  creature.  It  is,  con- 
sequently, perpetual,  that  is,  so  long  as  the  creature  itself 
exists. 

II.  But  the  dominion  of  God  is  the  right  of  the  Creator, 
and  his  power  over  the  creatures ;  according  to  which  he  has 
them  {jprojprias  sibf\  as  his  own  property,  and  can  command 
and  use  them,  and  do  about  them,  whatever  the  relation  of 
creation  and  the  equity  which  rests  upon  it,  permit. 

III.  For  the  right  cannot  extend  further  than  is  allowed  by 
that  cause  from  which  the  whole  of  it  arises,  and  on  which  it 
is  dependent.  For  this  reason,  it  is  not  agreeable  to  this  right 
of  God,  either  that  he  [addicat]  delivers  up  his  creature  to  an- 
other who  may  domineer  over  such  creature,  at  his  arbitrary 
pleasure,  so  that  he  be  not  compelled  to  render  to  God  an  ac- 
count of  the  exercise  of  his  sovereignty,  and  be  able,  without 
any  demerit  on  the  part  of  the  creature,  to  inflict  every  evil 
on  a  creature  capable  of  injury,  or,  at  least,  not  for  any  good 
of  this  creature  ;  or  that  he  [God]  command  an  act  to  be  done 
by  the  creature,  for  the  performance  of  which  he  neither  has, 
nor  can  have,  sufficient  and  necessary  powers  ;  or  that  he  em- 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


67 


ploy  the  creature  to  introduce  sin  into  the  world,  that  he  may, 
by  punishing  or  by  forgiving  it,  [evadat  gloriosus]  promote  his 
own  glory ;  or,  lastly,  to  do  concerning  the  creature  whatever 
he  is  able,  according  to  his  absolute  power,  to  do  concerning 
him,  that  is,  eternally  to  punish  or  to  afflict  him,  without  [his 
having  committed]  sin. 

lY.  As  this  is  a  power  over  rational  creatures,  (in  reference 
to  whom  chiefly  we  treat  on  the  dominion  and  power  of  God,) 
it  may  be  considered  in  two  views,  either  as  despotic,  or  as 
kingly,  or  patriarchal.  The  former  is  that  which  he  employs 
without  any  intention  of  good  which  may  be  useful  or  saving 
to  the  creature ;  that  latter  is  that  which  he  employs  when  he 
also  intends  the  good  of  the  creature  itself.  And  this  last  is 
used  by  God  through  the  abundance  of  his  own  goodness  and 
sufficiency,  until  he  considers  the  creature  to  be  unworthy,  on 
account  of  his  perverseness,  to  have  God  presiding  over  him 
in  his  kingly  and  paternal  authority. 

Y.  Hence,  it  is,  that,  when  God  is  about  to  command  some 
thing  to  his  rational  creature,  he  does  not  exact  every  thing 
which  he  [jure]  justly  might  do,  and  he  employs  persuasions 
through  arguments  which  have  regard  to  the  utility  and  neces- 
sity of  those  persuasions. 

YI.  In  addition  to  this,  God  enters  into  a  contract  or  cov- 
enant with  his  creature  ;  and  he  does  this  for  the  purpose  that 
the  creature  may  serve  him,  not  so  much  "  of  debt,"  as  from  a 
spontaneous,  free  and  liberal  obedience,  according  to  the  na- 
ture of  confederations  which  consist  of  stipulations  and  prom- 
ises. On  this  account,  God  frequently  distinguishes  his  law 
by  the  title  of  a  Covenant. 

YII.  Yet  this  condition  is  always  annexed  to  the  confedera- 
tion, that  if  man  be  unmindful  of  the  covenant  and  a  contemn- 
er of  its  pleasant  rule,  he  may  always  \urgeatur]  be  impelled 
or  governed  by  that  domination  which  is  really  lordly,  strict 
and  rigid,  and  into  which,  he  who  refuses  to  obey  the  other 
[species  of  rule],  justly  falls. 

YIII.  Hence,  arises  a  two-fold  right  of  God  ovel'  his  ra- 
tional creature.  The  fiest,  which  belongs  to  him  through 
creation ;  the  second,  through  contract.   The  former  rests  on 


68 


JAMES  AEMrNTCJS. 


the  good  whicli  the  creature  has  received  from  his  Creator ; 
the  latter  rests  on  the  still  greater  benefit  which  the  creature 
will  receive  from  God,  his  preserver,  promoter  and  glorifier. 

IX.  If  the  creature  happen  to  sin  against  this  two-fold 
right,  by  that  very  act,  he  gives  to  God,  his  Lord,  King  and 
Father,  the  right  of  treating  him  as  a  sinning  creature,  and 
of  inflicting  on  him  due  punishment ;  and  this  is  a  third 
right,  which  rests  on  the  wicked  act  of  the  creature  against 
God. 


DISPUTATIOE"  XXYHI. 

OK  THE  PEOVIDEJTCE  OF  GOD. 

I.  IToT  only  does  the  very  nature  of  God,  and  of  things 
themselves,  but  likewise  the  Scriptures  and  experience  do,  ev- 
idently, show  that  providence  belongs  to  God. 

II.  But  providence  denotes  some  property  of  God,  not  a 
quality,  or  \^jpotenti(i\  a  capability,  or  a  habit ;  but  it  is  an  act, 
which  is  not  ad  intra  nor  internal,  but  which  is  ad  extra  and 
external,  and  which  is  about  an  object  \cdi%id'\  different  from 
God,  and  that  is  not  united  to  him  from  all  eternity,  in  his  un- 
derstanding, but  as  separate  and  really  existing. 

III.  And  it  is  an  act  of  the  practical  understanding,  or  of 
the  will  employing  the  understanding,  not  ^^eractii8\  comple- 
ted in  a  single  moment,  but  continued  through  the  moments 
of  the  duration  of  things. 

lY.  And  it  may  be  defined  the  solicitous,  everywhere  power- 
ful, and  continued  [intuitus]  inspection  and  oversight  of 
God,  according  to  which  he  exercises  a  general  care  over  the 
whole  world,  and  over  each  of  the  creatures  and  their  actions 
and  passions,  in  a  manner  that  is  befitting  himself,  and  suita- 
ble for  his  creatures,  for  their  benefit,  especially  for  that  of 
pious  men,  and  for  a  declaration  of  the  divine  perfection. 

V.  We  have  represented  the  object  of  it  to  be  both  the 
whole  world  as  it  is  lunum  quid']  a  single  thing  consisting  of 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


69 


many  parts  which  have  a  certam  relation  among  themselves, 
and  possessing  order  between  each  other,  and  each  of  the  crea- 
tures^ with  its  actions  and  passions.  We  preserve  the  dis- 
tinction of  the  goodness  which  is  in  them,  (1.)  According  to 
their  nature,  through  creation ;  (2.)  According  to  grace, 
through  the  communication  of  supernatural  gifts,  and  eleva- 
tion to  dignities  ;  (3.)  According  to  the  right  use  both  of  na- 
ture and  grace ;  yet  we  ascribe  the  last  two,  also,  to  the  act  of 
providence. 

YI.  The  rule  of  providence,  according'  to  which  it  produces 
its  acts,  is  the  wisdom  of  God,  demonstrating  what  [cleceat']  is 
worthy  of  God,  according  to  his  goodiiess,  his  severity,  or  his 
love  for  justice  or  for  the  creature,  but  always  according  to 
equity. 

YII.  The  acts  of  providence  which  belong  to  its  execution, 
are— preservation^  which  appears  to  be  occupied  about  es- 
sences, qualities  and  quantities — and  government^  which 
presides  over  actions  and  passions,  and  of  which  the  principal 
acts  are  motion,  assistance,  concurrence  and  permission.  The 
three  former  of  these  acts  extend  themselves  to  good,  whether 
natural  or  moral ;  and  the  last  of  them  appertains  to  evil 
alone. 

YIII.  The  power  of  God  serves  universally,  and  at  all 
times,  to  execute  these  acts,  with  the  exception  of  permission ; 
specially,  and  sometimes,  these  acts  are  executed  by  the  crea- 
tures themselves.  Hence,  an  act  of  providence  is  called  either 
immediate  or  mediate.  When  it  employs  [the  agency  of]  the 
creatures,  then  it  permits  them  \_agere'\  to  conduct  their  motions 
agreeably  to  their  own  nature,  unless  it  be  his  pleasure  to  do 
any  thing  [prceter  ordineni]  out  of  the  ordinary  way. 

IX.  Then,  those  acts  which  are  performed  according  to  some 
certain  \tenorem'\  course  of  nature  or  of  grace,  are  called  ordi- 
nary  /  those  which  are  employed  either  beyond,  above,  or 
also  contrary  to  this  order,  are  styled  extraordinary  /  yet  they 
are  always  concluded  by  the  terms  \deceniicB  et  convenient  ice] 
due  fitness  and  suitableness,  of  which  we  have  treated  in  the 
definition.  (Thesis  IV.) 

X.  Degrees  are  laid  down  in  providence,  not  according  to 


70 


JAMES  AEMTNTUS. 


intuition  or  oversight  itself,  neither  according  to  presence  or 
continuity,  but  according  to  solicitude  and  care,  which  yet  are 
[secura]  free  from  anxiety,  but  which  are  greater  concerning  a 
man  than  concerning  bullocks,  also  greater  concerning  be- 
lievers and  pious  pei'sons,  than  concerning  those  who  are 
impious. 

XI.  The  end  of  providence  and  of  all  its  acts,  is  the  declara" 
tion  of  the  divine  perfections,  of  wisdom,  goodness,  justice, 
severity  and  power,  and  the  good  of  the  whole^  especially  of 
those  men  who  are  cliosen  or  elected. 

XII.  But  since  God  does  nothing,  or  permits  it  to  be  done 
in  time,  which  he  has  not  decreed  from  all  eternity,  either  to 
do  or  to  permit  that  decree,  therefore,  is  placed  before  provi- 
dence and  its  acts  as  an  internal  act  is  before  one  that  is 
external. 

XIII.  The  effect,  or,  rather,  the  consequence,  which  belongs 
to  God  himself,  is  his  prescience ;  and  it  is  partly  called  natu- 
ral and  necessary^  and  partly  free- — feee,  because  it  follows 
the  act  of  the  divine  free  will,  without  which  it  would  not  be 
the  object  of  it — natural  and  necessary,  so  far  as,  (when  this 
object  is  laid  down  by  the  act  of  the  divine  will,)  it  cannot  be 
unknown  by  the  divine  understanding. 

XIY.  Prediction  sometimes  follows  this  prescience,  when  it 
pleases  God  to  give  intimations  to  his  creatures  of  the  issues  of 
things,  before  they  come  to  pass.  But  neither  prediction  nor 
any  prescience  induces  a  necessity  of  any  thing  [futuro2]  that 
is  afterwards  to  be,  since  they  are  [in  the  divine  mind]  poste- 
rior in  nature  and  order  to  the  thing  that  is  future.  For  a 
thing  does  not  come  to  pass  because  it  has  been  foreknown  or 
foretold  ;  but  it  is  foreknown  and  foretold  because  it  is  yet 
[futura']  to  come  to  pass. 

XY.  ISTeither  does  the  decree  itself,  by  which  the  Lord 
administers  providence  and  its  acts,  induce  any  necessity  on 
things  future ;  for,  since  it,  the  decree,  (§  XII)  is  an  internal 
act  of  God,  it  lays  down  nothing  in  the  thing  itself  But 
things  come  to  pass  and  happen  either  necessarily  or  contin- 
gently, according  to  the  mode  of  power,  which  it  has  pleased 
God  to  employ  in  the  administration  of  affairs. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


71 


DISPUTATIO]^  XXIX. 

ON  THE  COVENANT  INTO  WHICH  GOD  ENTEEED  WITH  OUE 
FIRST  PARENTS. 

I.  Though,  according  to  his  right  and  power  over  man, 
whom  he  had  created  after  his  own  image,  God  could  prescribe 
obedience  to  him  in  all  things  for  the  perfoiiiiaiice  of  which 
he  possessed  suitable  powers,  or  would,  by  the  grace  of  God, 
have  them  in  that  state  ;  yet,  that  he  might  elicit  from-  man 
voluntary  and  free  obedience,  which,  alone,  is  grateful  to  him, 
it  was  his  will  to  enter  into  a  contract  and  covenant  with  him, 
by  which  God  required  obedience,  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
promised  a  reward,  to  which  he  added  the  denunciation  of  a 
punishment,  that  the  transaction  might  not  seem  to  be  entirely 
one  between  equals,  and  as  if  man  was  not  completely  bound 
to  God. 

II.  On  this  account,  the  law  of  God  is  very  often  called  a 
COVENANT,  because  it  consists  of  those  two  parts,  that  is,  a 
work  commanded,  and  a  reward  promised,  to  which  is  sub- 
joined the  denunciation  of  a  punishment,  to  signify  the  right 
which  God  had  over  man  and  which  he  has  not  altogether 
[remisit']  surrendered,  and  to  incite  man  to  greater  obedience. 

III.  God  prescribed  this  obedience,  first,  by  a  law  placed  in 
and  imprinted  on  the  mind  of  man,  in  which  is  contained  his 
natural  duty  towards  God  and  his  neighbor,  and,  therefore, 
towards  himself  also  ;  and  it  is  that  of  love,  with  fear,  honor 
and  worship  towards  a  superior.  For,  as  true  virtue  consists 
in  [ordinatione]  the  government  or  right  ordering  of  the 
affections,  (of  which  the  first,  the  chief,  and  that  on  which  the 
rest  depend,  is  love,)  the  whole  law  is  contained  in  the  right 
ordering  of  love.  And,  as  no  obedience  seems  to  be  yielded 
in  the  case  of  a  man  who  executes  the  whole  of  his  own  will 
without  any,  even  the  least  resistance,  therefore,  to  try  his 
obedience,  that  thing  was  to  be  prescribed,  to  which,  by  a 
certain  [affectu]  feeling,  man  had  an  abhorrence ;  and  that 
was  to  be  forbidden,  towards  which  he  was  drawn  by  a  certain 


JAMES  AHMTNTUS. 


incliDation.  Therefore  the  love  of  ourselves  was  to  be  rescu- 
lated  or  rightly  ordered,  which  is  the  first  and  proximate  cause 
that  man  should  live  [secundum  homing m]  in  society  with  his 
species,  or  according  to  humanity. 

lY.  To  this  law,  it  was  the  pleasure  of  God  to  add  another, 
which  was  a  symbolical  one.  A  symbolical  law  is  one  that 
prescribes  or  forbids  some  act,  which,  in  itself,  is  neither 
agreeable  nor  disagreeable  to  God,  that  is,  one  that  is  indiffer- 
ent ;  and  it  serves  for  this  purpose  that  God  may  try  whether 
man  is  willing  to  yield  obedience  to  him,  solely  on  this  ac- 
count, because  it  has  been  the  pleasure  of  God  to  require  such 
obedience,  and  though  it  were  impossible  to  devise  any  other 
reason  why  God  imposed  that  law. 

Y.  That  symbolical  law  was,  in  this  instance,  prohibitive  of 
some  act,  to  which  man  was  inclined  by  some  natural  pro- 
pensity, (that  is,  to  eat  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good 
and  of  evil,)  though  "  it  was  pleasant  to  the  eyes  and  good  for 
food."  By  the  commanding  of  an  indifferent  act,  it  does  not 
eeem  to  have  been  possible  to  try  the  obedience  of  man  with 
equal  advantage. 

YI.  This  seems  to  be  the  difference  between  each  [of  these 
kinds  of]  obedience,  that  the  first  (Thesis  I)  is  true  obedience 
and,  in  itself,  pleasing  to  God  ;  and  the  man  who  performs  it 
is  said  truly  to  live  according  to  godliness  ;  but  that  the  latter 
(Theses  lYand  Y)  is  not  so  much  obedience^  itself^  as  the  exter- 
nal jjr  of  ession  of  willingly  yielding  obedience  /  and  it  is  there- 
fore an  acknowledgment,  or  the  token  of  an  acknowledgment, 
by  which  man  professes  himself  to  be  subject  to  God,  and 
declares  that  he  is  willingly  subject.  Exactly  in  the  same 
manner,  a  vassal  yields  obedience  to  his  lord,  for  having  fought 
against  his  enemies,  which  obedience  he  confesses  that  he 
cheerfully  performs  to  him,  by  presenting  him  annually  with 
a  gift  of  small  value* 

YIL  From  this  comparison,  it  appears  that  the  obedience 
which  is  yielded  to  a  S3^mbolical  law  is  far  inferior  to  that 
which  is  yielded  to  a  natural  law,  but  that  the  disobedience 
manifested  to  a  symbolical  law  is  not  the  less  serious,  or  that 
it  is  even  more  grievous ;  because,  by  this  very  act,  man  pro- 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


73 


fesses  that  he  is  unwilling  to  submit  himself,  and  indeed  not 
to  yield  obedience  in  other  matters,  and  those  of  greater  im- 
portance, and  of  more  difficult  labor. 

YIII.  The  reward  that  corresponds  with  obedience  to  this 
chief  law,  the  performance  of  which  is,  of  itself,  pleasing  to 
God,  (the  analogy  and  difference  which  exist  between  God 
and  man  being  faithfully  observed,)  is  life  eternal,  [impletio] 
the  complete  satisfying  of  the  whole  of  our  will  and  desire. 
But  the  reward  which  answers  to  the  observance  of  the  sym- 
bolical law,  is  the  free  [fruitio]  enjoyment  of  the  fruits  of 
Paradise,  and  the  power  to  eat  of  the  tree  of  life,  by  the  eating 
of  which  man  was  always  restored  to  his  pristine  [rigorein\ 
strength.  But  this  tree  of  life  was  a  symbol  of  eternal  life, 
which  man  would  have  enjoyed,  if,  by  abstaining  from  eating  the 
fruit,  he  had  professed  obedience,  and  had  truly  performed 
such  obedience  to  the  moral  law. 

IX.  We  are  of  opinion  that,  if  our  first  parents  had  re- 
mained in  their  integrity  by  obedience  performed  to  both 
these  laws,  God  would  have  acted  with  their  posterity  by  the 
same  compact,  that  is,  by  their  yielding  obedience  to  the  moral 
law  inscribed  on  their  hearts,  and  to  some  symbolical  or  cere- 
monial law  ;  though  we  dare  not  specially  make  a  similar 
affirmation,  respecting  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil. 

X.  So,  likewise,  if  they  had  persisted  in  their  obedience  to 
both  laws,  we  think  it  very  probable  that,  at  certain  periods, 
men  would  have  been  translated  from  this  [aniinaW]  natural 
life,  by  the  intermediate  change  of  the  natural,  mortal  and 
corruptible  body,  into  a  body  spiritual,  immortal,  and  incor- 
ruptible, to  pass  a  life  of  immortality  and  bliss  in  heaven. 

COKOLLAET. 

We  allow  this  to  be  made  a  subject  of  discussion :  Did 
Eve  receive  this  symbolical  command  about  the  tree  of  the 
knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  immediately  from  God,  or  through 
Adam? 

6  TOL  II, 


74: 


JAMES  AEMrsrnis. 


DISPUTATION  XXX. 

THE  MANNER  EST  "WHICH  MAN  CONDUCTED  HDISELF  IN  FTLFILLING 
THE  FIRST  COVENANT,  OE  ON  THE  SIN  OF  OUR  FIRST  PARENTS. 

I.  When  God  had  entered  into  this  covenant  with  men,  it 
was  the  part  of  man  perpetually  to  form  and  direct  his  life 
according  to  the  conditions  and  laws  prescribed  by  this  cove- 
nant, because  he  would  then  have  obtained  the  rewards 
promised  through  the  performance  of  both  those  conditions, 
and  would  not  have  incurred  the  punishment  due  and  de- 
nounced to  disobedience.  We  are  ignorant  of  the  length  of 
time  in  which  man  fultilled  his  part ;  but  the  Holy  Scriptures 
testify  that  he  did  not  persevere  in  this  obedience. 

II.  But  we  say  the  violation  of  this  covenant  was  a  trans- 
gression of  the  symbolical  law  imposed  concerning  his  not 
eating  the  fruit  of  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil. 

III.  The  efficient  cause  of  that  transgression  was  man,  de- 
termining his  will  to  that  forbidden  object,  and  applying  his 
power  or  capability  to  do  it.  Eut  the  external,  moving,  ^er 
se^  and  principal  cause  was  the  devil,  who,  having  accosted 
the  woman,  (whom  he  considered  weaker  than  the  man,  and 
who  when  persuaded  herself,  would  easily  persuade  him,) 
employed  false  arguments  for  persuasion.  One  of  his  argu- 
ments was  deduced  from  the  usefulness  of  the  good  which 
would  ensue  from  this  act;  another  was  ded;  ced  from  the 
setting  aside  [prohibentis]  of  Him  who  had  prohibited  it,  that 
is,  by  a  denial  of  the  punishment  which  would  follow.  The 
instrumental  cause  was  the  serpent,  w^hose  tongue  the  devil 
abused  to  propose  what  arguments  he  chose.  The  accidental 
cause  was  the  fruit  itself,  which  seemed  good  for  food,  pleas- 
ant in  its  flavor,  and  desirable  to  the  eyes.  The  occasional 
cause  was  the  law  of  God,  that  circumscribed  by  its  interdict 
an  act  which  was  indifferent  in  its  nature,  and  for  which  man 
possessed  inclination  and  powers,  that  it  might  be  impossible 
for  this  offence  to  be  perpetrated  without  sin. 

lY.  The  inly  moving  or  antecedent  cause  was  a  two-fold 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


16 


[affectum']  inclination  in  man,  a  superior  one  for  the  likeness  of 
God,  and  an  inferior  one  for  the  desirable  fruit,  pleasant  to 
the  sight,  and  good  for  food."  Both  of  them  were  implanted 
by  God  through  creation  ;  but  thej  were  to  be  used  in  a  cer- 
tain method,  order  and  time.  The  immediate  and  proximate 
cause  was  the  will  of  man,  which  applied  itself  to  the  act,  the 
understanding  preceding  and  shewing  the  way ;  and  these  are 
the  causes  which  concurred  to  effect  this  sin,  and  all  of  which, 
as,  through  the  image  of  God,  he  was  able  to  resist,  so  was  it 
his  duty,  through  the  imposing  of  that  law,  to  have  resisted. 
Not  one  of  these,  therefore,  nor  others,  if  such  be  granted  in 
the  genus  of  causes,  imposed  any  necessity  on  man  [to  commit 
that  sin].  It  was  not  an  external  cause,  whether  you  consider 
God,  or  something  from  God,  the  devil,  or  man. 

Y.  (1.)  It  was  not  God  ;  for  since  he  is  the  chief  good,  he 
does  nothing  but  what  is  good ;  and,  therefore,  he  can  be 
called  neither  the  efficient  cause  of  sin,  nor  the  deficient  cause, 
since  he  has  employed  whatever  things  were  sufficient  and 
necessary  to  avoid  this  sin.  (2.)  l^either  was  it  something  in 
God ;  it  was  neither  his  understanding  nor  his  will,  which 
commands  those  things  which  are  just,  performs  those  which 
are  good,  and  permits  those  which  are  evil ;  and  this  permis- 
sion is  only  a  cessation  from  such  an  act  as  would  in  reality 
have  hindered  the  act  of  man,  by  effecting  nothing  [extra] 
beyond  itself,  but  by  suspending  some  efficiency.  This,  there- 
fore, cannot  be  the  cause.  (3.)  Nor  was  the  devil  the  cause  ; 
for  he  only  infused  counsel ;  he  did  not  impel,  or  force  by 
necessity.  (4.)  Eve  was  not  the  cause;  for  she  was  only  able 
to  precede  by  her  example,  and  to  entice  by  some  argument, 
but  not  to  compel. 

YI.  It  was  not  an  internal  cause — whether  you  consider  the 
common  or  general  nature  of  man,  which  [fe^^ebatur]  was 
inclined  only  to  one  good,  or  his  particular  nature,  which 
exactly  corresponded  with  that  which  is  general ;  nor  was  it 
any  thing  in  his  particular  nature,  for  this  would  have  been 
the  understanding  ;  but  it  could  act  by  persuasion  and  advice, 
not  by  necessity.    Man,  therefore,  sinned  by  his  free  will,  his 


76 


JAMES  ABMrtOUS. 


own  proper  motion  being  allowed  by  God,  and  himself  per- 
suaded by  the  devil. 

Yn.  The  matter  of  that  sin  was  the  eating  of  the  fmit  of 
the  tree — an  act  indifferent,  indeed,  in  its  nature,  but  forbidden 
by  the  imposing  of  a  law,  and  withdrawn  from  the  power  of 
man.  He  could  also  have  easily  abstained  from  it  without 
any  loss  of  pleasure.  In  this,  is  apparent  the  admirable  good- 
ness of  God,  who  tries  whether  man  be  willing  to  submit  to 
the  divine  command  in  a  matter  which  could  so  easily  be 
avoided. 

YIII.  The  form  was  the  transgression  of  the  law  imposed, 
or  the  act  of  eating  as  having  been  forbidden ;  for  as  it  had 
been  forbidden,  it  [excesserat]  had  gone  beyond  the  order  of 
lawful  and  good  acts,  and  had  been  taken  away  from  the 
[allowable]  power  of  man,  that  it  might  not  be  exercised  with- 
out sin. 

IX.  There  was  no  end  for  this  sin  ;  for  it  always  assumed 
\rationern\  the  shape  or  habit  of  good.  An  end,  however,  was 
proposed  by  man,  (but  it  was  not  obtained,  that  he  might 
satisfy  both  his  superior  [affectu']  propensity  towards  the 
image  of  God,  and  his  inferior  one  towards  the  fruit  of  the 
tree.  But  the  end  of  the  devil  was  the  aversion  of  man  from  his 
God,  and,  through  this,  his  [pertractio]  further  seduction  into 
exile,  and  the  society  of  the  evil  one.  But  the  permission  of 
God  had  respect  to  the  antecedent  condition  of  creation,  which 
had  made  men  possessed  of  free  will,  and  for  [the  performance 
of]  acts  glorious  to  God,  which  might  arise  from  it. 

X.  The  serious  enormity  of  that  sin  is  principally  manifest 
from  the  following  particulai-s :  (1.)  Because  it  was  a  trans- 
gression of  such  a  law  as  had  been  imposed  to  try  whether 
man  was  willing  to  be  [suUex]  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  and 
it  carried  with  it  numbers  of  other  grievous  sins.  (2.)  Because, 
after  God  had  loaded  man  with  such  signal  gifts,  he  [aiisus] 
had  the  audacity  to  perpetrate  this  sin.  (3.)  Because,  when 
there  was  such  great  facility  to  abstain  from  sin,  he  suffered 
himself  to  be  so  easily  induced,  and  did  not  satisfy  his  [affectui] 
inclination  in  such  a  copious  abundance  of  things.    (4.)  Be- 


PRIYATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


77 


cause  he  committed  that  sin  in  a  sanctified  place  wliicli  was  a 
type  of  the  heavenly  Paradise,  almost  under  the  eyes  of  God 
himself,  who  conversed  with  him  in  a  familiar  manner. 


DISPUTATIOE"  XXXI. 

ON  THE  EFFECTS  OF  THE  SIN  OF  OUR  FIRST  PARENTS. 

I.  The  first  and  immediate  effect  of  the  sin  which  Adam 
and  Eve  committed  in  eating  of  the  forbidden  fruit,  was  the 
offending  of  the  Deity,  and  guilt — offence^  which  arose  from 
the  prohibition  imposed — guilty  from  the  sanction  added  to  it, 
through  the  denunciation  of  punishment,  if  they  neglected  the 
prohibition. 

II.  From  the  offending  of  the  Deity,  arose  his  wrath  on 
account  of  the  violated  commandment.  In  this  violation, 
occur  three  causes  of  just  anger :  (1.)  The  [deivgatio]  dis- 
paragement of  his  power  or  right.  (2.)  A  denial  of  tha 
towards  which  God  [afficiehatur]  had  an  inclination.  (3.)  A 
contempt  of  the  divine  will  intimated  by  the  command. 

III.  Punishment  was  consequent  on  guilt  and  the  divine 
wrath ;  the  equity  of  this  punishment  is  from  guilt,  the  in- 
fliction of  it  is  by  wrath.  But  it  is  preceded  both  by  [offensa] 
the  wounding  of  the  conscience,  and  by  the  fear  of  an  angry 
God  and  the  dread  of  punishment.  Of  these,  man  gave  a 
token  by  his  subsequent  flight,  and  by  "  hiding  himself  from 
the  presence  of  the  Lord  God,  when  he  heard  him  walking  in 
the  garden  in  the  cool  of  the  day  and  calling  unto  Adam." 

lY.  The  assistant  cause  of  this  flight  and  hiding  [of  our  first 
parents]  was  a  consciousness  of  their  own  nakedness,  and 
shame  on  account  of  that  of  which  they  had  not  been  previ- 
ously ashamed.  This  seems  to  have  served  for  racking  the 
conscience,  and  for  exciting  or  augmenting  that  fear  and 
dread. 

Y.  The  Spirit  of  grace,  whose  abode  was  within  man,  could 
not  consist  with  a  consciousness  of  having  offended  God ;  and, 


78 


JAMES  AKMmiUS. 


therefore,  on  the  perpetration  of  sin  and  the  condemnation  of 
their  own  hearts,  the  Holy  Spirit  departed.  Wherefore,  the 
Spirit  of  God  likewise  ceased  to  lead  and  direct  man,  and  to 
bear  inward  testimony  to  his  heart  of  the  favor  of  God.  This 
circumstance  must  be  considered  in  the  place  of  a  heavy 
punishment,  when  the  law,  with  a  depraved  conscience, 
accused,  bore  its  testimony  [against  them],  convicted  and 
condemned  them. 

YI.  Beside  this  punishment,  which  was  instantly  inflicted, 
they  rendered  themselves  liable  to  two  other  punishments  ; 
that  is,  to  temporal  death,  which  is  the  separation  of  the  soul 
from  the  body ;  and  to  death  eternal,  which  is  the  separation 
of  the  entire  man  from  God,  his  chief  good. 

YII.  The  indication  of  both  these  punishments  was  the 
ejectment  of  our  first  parents  out  of  Paradise.  It  was  a  token 
of  death  temporal ;  because  Paradise  v/as  a  type  and  figure  of 
the  celestial  abode,  in  wliich  consummate  and  perfect  bliss 
ever  flourishes,  with  the  translucent  splendor  of  the  divine 
Majesty.  It  was  also  a  token  of  death  eternal ;  because,  in 
that  garden  was  planted  the  tree  of  life,  the  Iruit  of  which, 
when  eaten,  was  suitable  for  continuing  natural  life  to  man. 
without  the  intervention  of  death.  This  tree  was  both  a  sym- 
bol of  the  heavenly  life  of  which  man  was  bereft,  and  of  death 
eternal,  which  was  to  follow. 

YIII.  To  these  mxay  be  added  the  punishment  peculiarly 
inflicted  on  the  man  and  the  woman — on  the  former^  that  he 
must  eat  bread  through  "the  sweat  of  his  face,"  and  that  "the 
gi'ound,  cursed  for  his  sake,  should  bring  forth  to  him  thorns 
and  thistles  on  the  latter^  that  she  should  be  liable  to  various 
pains  in  conception  and  child-bearing.  The  punishment  in- 
flicted on  the  man  had  regard  to  \studiurrb\  his  care  to  preserve 
the  individuals  of  the  species,  and  that  on  the  woman,  to  the 
perpetuation  of  the  species. 

.  IX.  But  because  the  condition  of  the  covenant  into  which 
God  entered  with  our  first  parents  was  this,  that,  if  they  con- 
tinued in  the  favor  and  grace  of  God  by  an  observance  of  this 
command  and  of  others,  the  gifts  conferred  on  them  should  be 
transmitted  to  their  posterity,  by  the  same  divine  grace  which 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


79 


they  had,  themselves,  received  ;  but  that,  if  by  disobedience 
they  rendered  themselves  unworthy  of  those  blessings,  their 
posterity,  likewise,  [carerent]  should  not  possess  them,  and 
should  be  [ohnoxii]  liable  to  the  contrary  evils.  [Hlnc  acci- 
dit  ut]  This  was  the  reason  why  all  men,  who  were  to  be 
propagated  from  them  in  a  natural  way,  became  obnoxious  to 
death  temporal  and  death  eternal,  and  [vacui]  devoid  of  this 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  or  original  righteousness.  This  pun- 
ishment usually  receives  the  appellation  of  "  a  privation  of  the 
image  of  God,"  and  "  original  sin." 

X.  But  we  permit  this  question  to  be  made  a  subject  of  dis- 
cussion :  Must  some  contrary  quality,  beside  [carentiam']  the 
absence  of  original  righteousness,  be  constituted  as  another 
part  of  original  sin  ?  though  we  think  it  much  more  probable, 
that  this  absence  of  original  righteousness,  only,  is  original 
sin  itself^  as  being  that  which  alone  is  sufficient  to  commit 
and  produce  any  actual  sins  whatsoever. 

XI.  The  discussion,  whether  original  sin  be  propagated  by 
the  soul  or  by  the  body,  appears  to  us  to  be  useless ;  and 
therefore  the  other,  whether  or  not  the  soul  be  through  tra- 
duction, seems  also  scarcely  to  be  necessary  to  this  matter. 


DISPUTATION  XXXII. 

ON  THE  NECESSITY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION. 

I.  Without  religion,  man  can  have  no  union  with  God ; 
and  without  the  command  and  institution  of  God,  no  religion 
can  subsist,  which,  since  it  appertains'  to  himself,  either  by  the 
right  of  creation,  or  by  the  additional  right  [restitutionis']  of 
restoration,  he  can  vary  it  according  to  his  own  pleasure  ;  so 
that,  in  whatever  manner  he  may  appoint  religion,  he  always 
obligates  man  to  observe  it,  and  through  this  obligation,  im- 
poses on  him  the  necessity  of  observing  it. 

II.  But  the  mode  of  religion  is  not  changed,  except  with  a 
change  of  the  relation  between  God  and  man,  who  must  be 


80 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


united  to  him  ;  and  when  this  relation  is  changed,  religion  is 
varied,  that  is,  on  the  previous  supposition  that  man  is  yet  to 
be  united  to  God;  for,  as  to  its  substance,  (which  consists  in 
the  knowledge  of  God,  faith,  love,  &c.,)  religion  is  always  the 
same,  except  it  seem  to  be  referred  to  the  substance,  that 
Christ  enters  into  the  Christian  religion  as  its  object. 

III.  The  first  relation,  and  that  which  was  the  first  founda- 
tion of  the  primitive  religion,  was  the  relation  between  God 
and  man — ^between  God  as  the  Creator,  and  man  as  created 
after  the  image  and  [integer]  in  a  state  of  innocency  ;  where- 
fore the  religion  built  upon  that  relation  was  that  of  rigid  and 
strict  \_justitice]  righteousness  and  legal  obedience.  But  that 
relation  was  changed,  through  the  sin  of  man,  who  [iionjani] 
after  this  was  no  longer  innocent  and  acceptable  to  God,  but 
a  transgressor  and  [damndbilis]  doomed  to  damnation.  There- 
fore, after  [the  commisssion  of]  sin,  either  man  could  have 
had  no  hope  of  access  to  God  and  to  a  union  with  him,  since 
he  had  violated  and  abrogated  the  divine  worship ;  or  a  new 
relation  of  man  to  his  Creator  was  to  be  founded  by  God, 
through  his  gracious  restoration  of  man,  and  a  new  religion 
was  to  be  instituted  on  that  relation.  This  is  that  which  God 
has  done,  to  the  praise  of  his  own  glorious  grace. 

lY.  But,  as  God  is  not  the  restorer  of  a  sinner,  except  in  a 
mediator,  who  expiates  sins,  appeases  God,  and  sanctifies  the 
sinner,  I  repeat  it,  except  in  that  "  one  Mediator  between  God 
and  men,  the  man  Christ  Jesus,"  it  was  not  the  will  of  our 
most  glorious  and  most  gracious  God,  alone  and  without  this 
Mediator,  either  that  there  should  be  any  foundation  between 
him  and  the  sinner  restored  by  him,  or  that  there  should  be 
an  object  to  the  religion,  w^hich,  to  the  honor  of  the  restorer 
and  to  the  eternal  lelioity  of  the  restored,  he  would  construct 
upon  that  relation.  For  it  pleased  the  Father,  through  Christ, 
to  reconcile  all  things  to  himself,  and  by  him  to  restore  both 
those  things  which  are  in  heaven,  and  those  on  earth.  It  also 
pleased  the  Father  "  that  all  men  should  honor  the  Son,  even 
as  they  honor  the  Father so  that  whosoever  does  not 
honor  the  Son,  does  not  honor  the  Father. 

Y.  Wherefore,  after  the  entrance  of  sin,  there  has  been  no 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


81 


salvation  of  men  hy  God,  except  through  Christ,  and  no  sa- 
ving worship  of  God,  except  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and  with 
regard  to  him  who  is  [Christus]  tlie  Anointed  One  for  sinners, 
but  the  savior  of  them  who  believe  on  hira ;  so  that  whoso- 
ever is  without  God  is  without  Christ ;  and  he  that  is  without 
Christ,  is  without  the  faith,  the  worship  and  the  religion  of 
Christ ;  and  without  the  faith  and  hope  of  this  Christ,  either 
promised  and  shadowed  forth  in  types,  or  exhibited  and  clear- 
ly announced,  neither  [antiquitas]  were  the  ancient  patriarchs 
saved,  nor  can  we  be  saved. 

YI.  On  this  account,  as  the  transgression  of  the  first  cove- 
nant contains  the  necessity  of  constituting  another  religion, 
and  as  this  would  not  have  occurred  if  that  first  covenant  had 
not  been  made,  it  appears  that  those  things  upon  which  the 
Scriptures  treat,  concerning  the  first  covenant,  and  its  trans- 
gression on  the  part  of  the  first  human  beings,  contain  the 
occasion  of  the  restoration  which  God  was  to  make  through 
Christ,  and  that  they  were,  therefore,  to  be  thus  treated  in  the 
Christian  religion.  This  conclusion  is  easily  drawn  from  the 
very  form  of  the  narration  given  by  Moses. 

YII.  God  is  also  the  object  of  the  Christian  religion,  both 
as  Creator,  and  as  Restorer  in  Christ,  the  Son  of  his  love  ; 
and  these  titles  contain  the  reason  w^hy  God  can  demand  i-eli- 
gion  from  man,  who  has  been  formed  by  his  Creator  a  crea- 
ture, and  by  his  Restorer  a  new  creature.  In  this  object, 
also,  must  be  considered  what  \yelit  esse'\  is  the  will  of  the 
Glorifier  of  man,  who  leads  him  out  from  the  demerit  of  sin, 
and  from  misery,  to  eternal  felicity.  These  three  names.  Cre- 
ator, Restorer  and  Glorifier,  contain  the  most  powerful 
arguments  by  wdiich  man  is  persuaded  to  religion. 

YIII.  But  because  it  was  the  good  pleasure  of  God  to  make 
this  restoration  through  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  the  Mediator, 
therefore,  the  Son  of  God,  as  constituted  by  the  Father  Christ 
and  Lord,  is  likewise  an  object  of  the  Christian  religion  sub- 
ordinate to  God ;  though  he  on  earth,  as  the  Word  of  his  Fa- 
ther, both  may  be  and  ought  to  be  considered  as  existing  in 
the  Father  from  all  eternity. 


82 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


DISPUTATIO^T  XXXIII. 

ON  THE  RESTORATION  OF  MAN. 

I.  Since  God  is  the  object  of  the  Christian  religion,  not 
only  as  the  Creator,  but  also  and  properly  as  the  Restorer,  of 
the  human  race,  and  as  we  have  finished  our  treatise  on  the 
creation,  we  will  no  proceed  to  treat  on  the  restoration  of 
mankind,  because  it  is  that  which  contains,  in  itself,  another 
cause  why  God  by  deserved  right  can  require  religion  from  a 
man  and  a  sinner. 

II.  This  restoration  is  the  restitution,  and  the  new  or  the 
second  creation,  of  sinful  man,  obnoxious  through  sin  to  death 
temporal  and  eternal,  and  to  the  dominion  of  sin. 

III.  The  antecedent  or  inly  moving  cause  is  the  gracious 
mercy  of  God,  by  which  [voluit]  it  was  his  pleasure  to  pardon 
sin  and  to  succor  the  misery  of  his  creature. 

lY.  The  matter  about  which  [it  is  exercised]  is  man,  a  sin- 
ner, and,  on  account  of  sin,  obnoxious  to  the  wrath  of  God 
and  the  servitude  of  sin.  Tliis  matter  contains  in  itself  the 
outwardly  moving  cause  of  his  gracious  mercy,  but  accident- 
ally, through  this  circumstance,  that  God  delights  in  mercy  ; 
for  [almjuiri]  in  every  other  respect  sin  \^  'perse  and  properly 
the  external  and  meritorious  cause  of  wrath  and  damnation. 

Y.  We  may  indeed  conceive  the  form,  under  the  general 
notion  of  restitution,  reparation,  or  redemption ;  but  we  do 
not  venture  to  give  an  explanation  of  it,  except  under  two  par- 
ticular acts,  the  first  of  which  is  the  remission  of  sins,  or  the 
being  received  into  favor  ;  the  other  is  the  renewal  or  sanctifi- 
cation  of  sinful  man  after  the  image  of  God,  in  which  is  con- 
tained his  adoption  into  a  son  of  God. 

YI.  The  first  end  is  the  praise  of  the  glorious  grace  of  God, 
which  springs  from,  and  exists  at  the  same  time  with,  the  very 
act  of  restitution  or  redemption ;  tiie  other  end  is,  that,  after 
men  have  been  thus  repaired,  they  "should  live  soberly, 
righteously  and  godly,  in  this  present  world,"  and  should  at- 
tain to  a  blissful  felicity  in  the  world  to  come. 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


83 


YII.  But  it  has  pleased  God  not  to  exercise  this  mercy  in 
restoring  man,  without  the  declaration  of  his  justice,  by  which 
he  loves  righteousness  and  hates  sin  ;  and  he  has,  therefore, 
appointed  that  the  mode  of  transacting  this  restoration  should 
be  tln-ough  a  mediator  intervening  between  him  and  sinful 
man,  and  that  this  restoration  should  be  so  performed  as  to 
make  it  certain  and  evident  that  God  hates  sin  and  loves  righte- 
ousness, and  that  it  is  his  will  to  remit  nothing  of  his  own 
right,  except  after  his  justice  had  been  satisfied. 

YIII.  For  the  fulfilling  of  this  mediation,  God  has  consti- 
tuted his  only  begotten  Son  the  mediator  between  him  and 
men,  and  indeed  a  mediator  through  his  own  blood  and  death ; 
for  it  was  not  the  will  of  God  that,  without  the  shedding  of 
blood  and  the  intervention  of  the  death  of  the  Testator  him- 
self, there  should  be  any  remission,  or  a  confirmation  of  the 
Kew  Testament,  which  promises  remission  and  the  inscribing 
of  the  law  of  God  in  the  hearts  [of  believers]. 

IX.  This  is  the  reason  why  the  second  object  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  in  subordination  to  God,  is  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Mediator  of  this  restoration,  after  the  Father  had  made  him 
Christ  [the  Anointed  One]  and  had  constituted  him  the  Lord 
and  the  Head  of  the  church,  so  that  we  must,  through  him, 
approach  to  God  for  the  purpose  of  performing  [acts  of]  reli- 
gion to  him ;  and  the  duty  of  religion  must  be  rendered  to 
him,  vv^ith  God  the  Father,  from  which  duty  we  by  no  means 
exclude  the  Spirit  of  the  Father  and  the  Son. 


DISPUTATION  XXXIY. 

ox  THE  PERSON  OF  OUK  LOED  JESUS  CHEIST. 

I.  Because  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  secondary  object  of 
the  Christian  religion,  we  must  further  treat  on  him,  as  such, 
in  a  few  disputations.  But  we  account  it  necessary,  in  the 
first  place,  to  consider  the  person,  [qualis]  of  what  hind  he  is, 
in  himself. 


84: 


JAMES  AiJMINIUS. 


n.  We  say  that  tliis  person  is  the  Son  of  God  and  the  son 
of  man,  consisting  of  two  natures,  the  divine  and  the  human, 
inseparably  united  without  mixture  or  confusion,  not  only  ac- 
cording to  habitude  or  [inhahitatio]  indwelling,  but  likewise 
by  that  union  which  the  ancients  have  correctly  denominated 
hypostatical. 

III.  He  has  the  same  nature  with  the  Father,  by  internal 
and  external  communication. 

lY.  He  has  his  human  nature  from  the  virgin  Mary  through 
the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  [supervenit]  came  upon 
her  and  overshadowed  her  by  fecundating  her  seed,  so  that 
from  it  the  promised  Messiah  should,  in  a  supernatural  man- 
ner, be  born. 

Y.  But,  according  to  his  human  nature,  he  consists  of  a 
body  truly  organic,  and  of  a  soul  truly  human  which  \vivifica- 
vit\  quickened  or  animated  his  body.  In  this,  he  is  similar 
to  other  persons  or  human  beings,  as  well  as  in  all  the  essen- 
tial and  natural  properties  both  of  body  and  soul. 

YI.  From  this  personal  union  arises  a  communication  \idi- 
omatuni]  of  forms  or  properties  ;  such  communication,  how- 
ever, was  not  real^  as  though  some  things  which  are  proper  to 
the  divine  nature  were  eflfused  into  the  human  nature ;  but  it 
was  verbal^  yet  it  rested  on  the  truth  of  this  union,  and  intima- 
ted the  closest  conjunction  of  both  the  natures. 

COKOLLAKY. 

The  word  auro^soj,  "very  God,"  so  far  as  it  signifies  that  the 
Son  of  God  has  the  divine  essence  from  himself,  cannot  be  as- 
cribed to  the  Son  of  God,  according  to  the  Scriptures  and  the 
sentiments  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  churches. 


PEIYATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


85 


DISPUTATION^  XXXY. 

ON  THE  PEIESTLT  OFFICE  OF  CHTIST. 

I.  Though  the  person  of  Christ  is,  on  account  of  its  excel- 
lence, most  worthy  to  be  honored  and  worshiped,  yet,  that  he 
might  be,  according  to  God,  the  object  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion, two  other  things,  through  the  will  of  God,  were  necessa- 
ry :  (1.)  That  he  should  undertake  some  offices  for  the  saka 
of  men,  to  obtain  eternal  salvation  for  them.  (2.)  That  God 
should  l)estow  on  him  dominion  or  lordship  over  all  things, 
and  full  power  to  save  and  to  damn,  with  an  express  com- 
mand, "  that  all  men  should  honor  the  Son  even  as  they  hon- 
or the  Father,"  and  that  "  every  knee  should  bo^v  to  him,  to 
the  glory  of  God  the  Father." 

II.  Both  these  things  are  comprehended  together  under  the 
title  of  Savior  and  Mediator.  He  is  a  Savior,  so  far  as  that 
comprises  the  end  of  both,  and  a  Mediator,  as  it  denotes  the 
method  of  performing  the  end  of  both.  For  the  act  of  saving, 
so  far  as  it  is  ascribed  to  Christ,  denotes  the  acquisition  and 
communication  of  salvation.  But  Christ  is  the  Mediator  of 
men  before  God  in  soliciting  and  obtaining  salvation,  and  the 
Mediator  of  God  with  men  in  imparting  it.  .  We  will  now 
treat  on  the  former  of  these. 

III.  The  Mediator  of  men  before  God,  and  their  Savior 
through  [impetrationeni]  the  soliciting  and  the  acquisition  of 
salvation,  (which  is  also  called,  by  the  orthodox,  "  through  the 
mode  of  merit,")  has  been  constituted  a  priest,  by  God,  not  ac- 
cording to  the  order  of  Levi,  but  according  to  that  of  Melchis- 
edec,  who  was  "  priest  of  the  most  high  God,"  and  at  the  same 
time  "  king  of  Salem." 

lY.  Through  the  nature  of  a  true  and  not  of  a  typical 
priest  was  at  once  both  priest  and  victim  in  one  person,  which 
[duty],  therefore,  he  could  not  perform  except  through  true 
and  [solidam]  substantial  obedience  towards  God  who  impo- 
sed the  office  on  him. 


86 


JAMES  AEMDrrrs. 


Y.  In  the  priesthood  of  Christ,  must  be  considered  the 
prepanition  for  the  oflBce,  and  the  discharge  of  it.  (1.)  The 
PKEPAEATiox  is  that  of  the  priest  and  of  the  victim  ;  the piiest 
was  prepared  by  vocation  or  the  imposition  of  the  office,  bj 
the  sanctification  and  consecration  of  his  person  through  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  through  his  obedience  and  sufferings,  and 
even  in  some  respect  bj  his  resuscitation  from  the  dead.  The 
victim  "was  also  prepared  by  separation,  by  obedience,  (for  it 
was  necessary  that  the  victim  should  likewise  be  holy,)  and 
by  being  slain. 

YI.  (2.)  The  DiscHAEGE  of  this  office  consists  in  the  offering 
or  presentation  of  the  sacrifice  of  his  body  and  blood,  and  in 
his  intercession  before  God.  Benediction  or  blessing,  which, 
also,  belonged  to  the  sacerdotal  office  in  the  Old  Testament, 
will,  in  this  case,  be  more  appropriately  referred  to  the  very 
communication  of  salvation,  as  we  read  in  the  Old  Testament 
that  kings,  also,  dispensed  benedictions. 

YII.  The  [apotlesmatd]  results  of  the  fulfillment  of  the  sa- 
cerdotal office  are,  reconciliation  with  God,  the  obtaining  of 
eternal  redemption,  the  remission  of  sins,  the  Spirit  of  grace, 
and  life  eternal. 

YIII.  Indeed,  in  this  respect,  the  priesthood  of  Chnst  was 
propitiatory.  But,  because  we,  also,  by  his  beneficence  have 
been  constituted  priests  to  ofter  thanksgivings  to  God  through 
Christ,  therefore,  he  is  also  a  eucharistical  priest,  so  far  as  he 
offei^  our  sacrifices  to  God  the  Father,  that,  when  they  are 
offered  by  his  hands,  the  Father  may  receive  them  with  ac- 
ceptance. 

IX.  It  is  evident,  from  those  things  which  have  been  now 
advanced,  that  Christ,  in  his  sacerdotal  office,  has  neither  any 
successor,  vicar,  nor  associate,  whether  we  consider  the  obla- 
tion, both  of  his  propitiatory  sacrifice  which  he  offered  of 
those  things  which  were  his  own,  and  of  his  eucharistical  sa- 
crifice which  he  offered  of  those  also,  which  belonged  to  us, 
or  whether  we  consider  his  intercession. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


87 


COROLLARIES. 

I.  We  deny  that  the  comparison  between  the  priesthood  of 
Christ  and  that  of  Melchisedec,  consisted  either  principally  or 
in  any  manner  in  this,  that  Melchisedec  offered  bread  and 
wine  when  he  met  Abraham  retm-ning  from  the  slaughter  of 
the  kings. 

II.  That  the  propitiatory  sacrijQce  of  Christ  is  bloodless,  im- 
plies a  contradiction,  according  to  the  Scriptures. 

III.  The  living  Christ  {rep^msentatur]  is  presented  to  the 
Father  in  no  other  place  than  in  heaven.  Therefore,  he  is  not 
offered  in  the  mass. 


DISPUTATION  XXXYI. 

ON  THE  PROPHETICAL  OFFICE  OF  CHRIST. 

The  prophetical  office  of  Christ  comes  under  consideration 
in  two  views — either  as  he  executed  it  in  his  own  person 
\conversatus\  while  he  was  a  sojourner  on  earth,  or  as  he  ad- 
ministered it  when  seated  in  heaven,  at  the  right  hand  of  the 
Father.  In  the  present  disputation,  we  shall  treat  upon  it  ac- 
cording to  the  former  of  these  relations. 

II.  The  proper  object  of  the  prophetical  office  of  Christ  was 
not  the  law,  though  [exylicuerit^  he  explained,  or]  fulfilled 
that,  and  freed  it  from  depraved  corruptions  ;  neither  was  it 
ST^ayysXia^  the  promise,  though  he  confirmed  that  which  had 
been  made  to  the  fathers  ;  but  it  was  the  gospel  and  the  'New 
Testament  itself,  or  "  the  kingdom  of  heaven  and  its  righte- 
ousness." 

III.  In  this  prophetical  office  of  Christ  are  to  be  considered 
both  the  imposition  of  the  office,  and  the  discharge  of  it.  1. 
The  imposition  has  sanctification,  instruction  or  furnishing, 
inauguration,  and  the  promise  of  assistance. 

lY.  (1.)  Sanctification  is  that  by  which  the  Father  sancti- 
fied him  to  his  office,  from  the  very  moment  of  his  concep:^on 


88 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


by  the  Holy  Spirit,  (whence,  he  says,  "  To  this  end  was  I 
born,  and  for  this  cause  came  I  into  the  world,  that  I  should 
bear  witness  unto  the  truth,")  and,  indeed,  in  a  manner  far 
more  excellent  than  that  by  which  Jeremiah  and  John  are 
eaid  to  have  been  sanctified. 

Y.  (2.)  Instruction,  or  furnishing,  is  a  conferring  of  those 
gifts  which  are  necessary  for  discharging  the  duties  of  the 
prophetical  office  ;  and  it  consists  in  a  most  copious  efi'usion 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  him,  and  in  its  \_mansione\  abiding 
in  him — "  the  Spirit  of  wisdom  and  understanding,  of  coun- 
sel and  might,  of  knowledge  and  of  the  fear  of  the  Lord 
by  which  Spirit  [  factum  itt\  it  came  to  pass  that  it  w^as  his 
will  to  teach  according  to  godliness  all  those  things  which 
were  to  be  taught,  and  that  [auderet]  he  had  the  courage  to 
teach  them — his  mind  and  aflfections,  both  concupiscible  and 
irrascible,  having  been  sufficiently  and  abundantly  instructed 
or  furnished  against  all  impediments. 

YI.  But  the  instruction  in  things  necessary  to  be  known  is 
said,  in  the  Scriptures,  to  be  imparted  by  vision  and  hearing, 
by  a  familiar  [intuitionem]  knowledge  of  the  secrets  of  the 
Father,  which  is  intimated  in  the  phrase  in  which  he  is  said 
to  be  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  and  in  heaven. 

YH.  (3.)  His  inauguration  was  made  by  the  baptism  which 
John  conferred  on  him,  when  a  voice  came  from  the  Father 
in  heaven,  and  the  Spirit,  "  in  a  bodily  shape,  like  a  dove, 
descended  upon  him."  These  were  like  [litter cb  jiduciaricB] 
credential  letters,  by  which  the  power  of  teaching  was  assert- 
ed and  claimed  for  him  as  the  ambassador  of  the  Father. 

YHI.  (4.)  To  this,  must  be  subjoined  the  promised  perpet- 
ual assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  resting  and  remaining  upon 
him  in  this  very  \sign6]  token  of  a  dove,  that  he  might  ad- 
minister [animose]  with  spirit  an  office  so  arduous. 

IX.  2.  In  the  discharge  of  this  office,  are  to  be  considered 
the  propounding  of  the  doctrine,  its  confirmation  and  the  re- 
sult. 

X.  (1.)  The  propounding  of  the  doctrine  was  made  in  a, 
manner  suitable,  both  to  the  things  themselves,  and  to  persons 


PKIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


89 


— to  liis  own  person,  and  to  the  persons  of  tliose  whom  he 
taught  with  grace  and  authority,  by  accepting  the  person  of 
no  man,  of  whatsoever  state  or  condition  he  might  be. 

XL  (2.)  The  confirmation  was  given  both  by  the  holiness- 
which  exactly  answers  to  the  doctrine,  and  by  miracles,  pre- 
dictions of  future  things,  the  revealing  of  the  thoughts  of 
men  and  of  other  secrets,  and  by  his  most  bitter  and  contu- 
melious death. 

XII.  (3.)  The  result  was  two-fold  :  The  first  was  one  that 
agreed  with  the  nature  of  the  doctrine  itself — the  conversion 
of  a  few  men  to  him,  but  without  such  a  knowledge  of  him 
as  the  doctrine  required ;  for  their  thoughts  were  engaged 
with  the  notion  of  restoring  the  external  kingdom.  The  seo 
OND,  which  arose  from  the  depraved  wickedness  of  his  audit>- 
ors,  was  the  rejection  of  the  doctrine,  and  of  him  who  taught 
it,  his  crucifixion  and  murder.  Wherefore,  he  complains  con- 
cerning himself,  in  Isaiah  xlix,  4 :  "  I  have  labored  in  vain,  I 
have  spent  my  strength  for  nought." 

XIII.  As  God  foreknew  that  this  would  happen,  it  is  cer- 
tain that  he  willed  this  prophetical  office  to  serve,  for  the  con- 
secration of  Christ,  through  sufiferings,  to  undertake  and  ad- 
minister the  sacerdotal  and  regal  office.  And  thus  the 
prophetical  office  of  Christ,  so  far  as  it  was  administered  bj 
him  through  his  apostles  and  others  of  his  servants,  was  the 
means  by  which  his  church  was  brought  to  the  faith,  and  was 
saved. 

COEOLLART. 

We  allow  this  question  to  become  a  subject  of  discussion  : 
Did  the  soul  of  Christ  receive  any  knowledge  immediately 
from  the  Logos  operating  on  it,  without  the  intervention  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  which  is  called  the  Icnowledge  of  union  7 
7  tol;  n. 


r 


90  JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


DISPUTATIOlSr  XXXYII. 

ON  THE  KEGAL   OFFICE  OF  CHRIST. 

L  As  Christ,  when  consecrated  by  his  sufferings,  was  made 
the  author  of  salvation  to  all  who  obey  him  ;  and  as  for  this 
end,  not  only  the  solicitation  and  the  obtaining  of  blessings 
were  required,  (to  which  the  sacerdotal  office  was  devoted,)  but 
also  the  communication  of  them,  it  was  necessary  for  him  to 
be  invested  with  the  regal  dignity,  and  to  be  constituted  Lord 
over  all  things,  with  full  power  to  bestow  salvation,  and  what- 
ever things  are  necessary  for  that  purpose. 

II.  The  kingly  office  of  Christ  is  a  mediatorial  function,  by 
which,  the  Father  having  constituted  him  Lord  over  all  things 
which  are  in  heaven  and  in  earth,  and  peculiarly  the  King 
and  the  Head  of  his  church,  he  governs  all  things  and  the 
church,  to  her  salvation  and  the  glory  of  God.  We  will  view 
this  ofHce  in  accommmodation  to  the  church,  because  we  are 
principally  concerned  in  this  consideration. 

III.  The  functions  belonging  to  this  office  seem  to  be  the 
following :  Yocation  to  a  participation  in  the  kingdom  of 
Christ,  legislation,  the  conferring  of  the  blessings  in  this  life 
necessary  to  salvation,  the  averting  of  the  evils  opposed  to 
them,  and  the  last  judgment  and  the  circumstances  connected 
with  it. 

lY.  Yocation  is  the  first  function  of  the  regal  office  of 
Christ,  by  which  he  calls  sinful  men  to  repent  and  believe  the 
gospel — a  reward  being  proposed  concerning  a  participation 
of  the  kingdom,  and  a  threatening  added  of  eternal  destruc- 
tion from  the  presence  of  the  Lord. 

Y.  Legislation  is  the  second  function  of  the  regal  office  of 
Christ,  by  which  h,e  prescribes  to  believers  their  duty,  that,  as 
his  subjects,  they  are  bound  to  perform  to  him,  as  their  Head 
and  Prince — a  sanction  being  added  through  rewards  and 
punishments,  which  properly  agree  with  the  state  of  this  spir- 
itual kingdom. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIOK. 


91 


YI.  Among  the  blessings  which  the  third  function  of  the 
regal  office  of  Christ  serves  to  communicate,  we  number  not 
only  the  remission  of  sins  and  the  Spirit  of  grace  inwardly 
witnessing:  with  our  hearts  that  we  are  the  children  of  God, 
but  likewise  all  those  blessings  which  are  necessary  for  the 
discharge  of  the  office ;  as  illumination,  the  inspiring  of  good 
thoughts  and  desires,  [corrohoratio]  strength  against  tempta- 
tions, and,  in  brief,  the  inscribing  of  the  lav/  of  God  in  our 
hearts.  In  addition  to  these,  as  many  of  the  blessings  of  this 
[animalis]  natural  life,  as  Christ  knows  will  contribute  to  the 
salvation  of  those  who  believe  in  him.  But  the  evils  over  the 
averting  of  which  this  function  presides,  must  be  understood 
as  being  contrary  to  these  blessings. 

YIT.  Judgment  is  the  last  act  of  the  regal  office  of  Christ,  by 
which,  justly,  and  without  respect  of  persons,  he  pronounces 
sentence  concerning  all  the  thoughts,  words,  deeds  and  omissions 
of  all  men,  who  have  been  previously  summoned  and  placed  be- 
fore his  tribunal ;  and  by  which  he  irresistibly  executes  that  sen- 
tence through  a  just  and  gracious  [retributionem]  rendering  of 
rewards,  and  through  the  due  retribution  of  punishments, 
which  consist  in  the  bestowing  of  life  eternal,  and  in  the  in- 
fliction of  death  eternal. 

YIII.  The  results  or  consequences  which  correspond  with 
these  functions,  are,  (1.)  The  collection  or  gathering  together 
of  the  church,  or  the  building  of  the  temple  of  Jehovah  ;  this 
gathering  together  consists  of  the  calling  of  the  gentiles,  and 
the  bringing  back  or  the  restoration  of  the  Jews,  through  the 
faith  which  answers  to  the  divine  vocation.  (2.)  Obedience 
performed  to  the  commands  of  Christ  by  those  who  have  be- 
lieved in  the  Lord,  and  who  have,  through  faith,  been  made 
citizens  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  (3.)  The  obtaining  of  the 
remission  of  sins,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  of  other  bles- 
sings which  conduce  to  salvation,  as  well  as  a  deliverance 
from  the  evils  which  molest  [believers]  in  the  present  life. 
(5.)  Lastly.  The  resurrection  from  the  dead,  and  a  participa- 
tion of  life  eternal. 

IX.  The  means  by  which  Christ  administers  his  kingdom, 
and  which  principally  come  under  our  observation  in  consid- 


92 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


ering  the  cliurch,  are  the  word,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  which 
ought  never  to  be  separated  from  each  other.  For  this  Spirit 
ordinarily  employs  the  word,  or  the  meaning  of  the  word,  in 
its  external  preaching  ;  and  the  word  alone,  without  the  illu- 
mination and  the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  insufficient. 
But  Christ  never  separates  these  two  things,  except  through 
the  fault  of  those  who  reject  the  word  and  resist  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

X.  The  opposite  results  to  these  consequences  are,  the  cast- 
ing away  of  the  yoke  [of  Christ],  the  imputation  of  sin,  the 
denial  or  the  withdrawing  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  deliver- 
ing over  to  the  power  of  Satan  to  a  reprobate  mind,  and  to 
hardness  of  heart,  with  other  temporal  evils,  and,  lastly, 
death  eternal. 

XI.  From  these  things,  it  appears  that  the  proj^hetical 
office,  by  which  a  church  is  collected  through  the  word,  ought 
to  be  [succenturiatwri]  a  reserve  or  accessary  to  the  regal 
office  ;  and,  therefore,  that  the  administrators  of  it  are  rightly 
denominated  "  the  apostles  and  the  servants  of  Christ,"  as  of  him 
who  sends  them  forth  into  the  whole  world,  over  which  he  has 
the  power,  and  who  puts  words  into  their  mouths,  whose  con- 
tinued assistance  is  likewise  necessary,  that  the  word  may 
produce  such  fruit  as  agrees  with  its  nature.  • 

XH.  This  regal  office  is  so  peculiar  to  Christ,  under  God 
the  Father,  that  he  admits  no  man,  even  subordinately,  into  a 
participation  of  it,  as  if  he  would  employ  such  an  one  for  a 
ministerial  head.  For  this  reason,  we  say,  that  the  Roman 
pontiff,  who  calls  himself  the  head  and  spouse,  though  mider 
Christ,  is  Antichrist. 


DISPUTATION  XXXYHI. 


I.  Eespecting  the  imposition  and  the  execution  of  the  offices 
which  belong  to  Christ,  two  states  of  his  usually  come  under 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


93 


consideration,  both  of  them  being  required  for  this  purpose — • 
that  he  may  be  able  to  bear  the  name  of  Savior  according  to 
the  will  of  God,  and,  in  reality,  to  perform  the  thing  signified 
under  this  name.  One  of  these  states  is  that  of  his  humilia- 
tion, and  is,  according  to  the  flesh,  [animalis]  natural ;  the 
other  is  that  of  glory,  according  to  the  Spirit,  and  is  spiritual. 

II.  To  the  first  state,  that  of  his  humiliation,  belong  the 
following  articles  of  our  belief :  "He  suffered  under  Pontius 
Pilate,  was  crucified,  dead  and  buried ;  he  descended  into 
hell."  To  the  latter  state,  that  of  his  exaltation,  belong  these 
articles  :  "  He  arose  again  from  the  dead  ;  he  ascended  into 
heaven,  and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God  the  Father  Al- 
mighty ;  from  thence  he  shall  come  to  judge  the  quick  and 
the  dead." 

III.  The  sufferings  of  Christ  contain  every  kind  of  reproach- 
es and  torments,  both  of  soul  and  body,  which  were  inflicted 
on  him  partly  by  the  fury  of  his  enemies,  and  partly  by  the 
immediate  chastisement  of  his  Father.  We  say  that  these 
last  are  not  contrary  to  the  good  of  the  natural  life,  but  to  that 
of  the  spiritual  life.  But  we  deduce  the  commencement  of 
these  sufferings  [a  eaptivitate]  from  the  time  when  he  was 
taken  into  custody ;  for  we  consider  those  things  which  pre- 
viously befell  him,  rather  to  have  been  -c^po-Tra^sja^,  forerunners 
of  his  sufferings,  by  which  [explorai^etur]  it  might  be  put  to 
the  test,  whether,  with  the  prescience  of  those  things  which 
were  to  be  endured,  and,  indeed,  through  an  experimental 
knowledge,  he  would  still  be  ready  by  voluntary  obedience  to 
endure  other  sufferings. 

lY.  The  crucifixion  has  the  mode  of  murder,  by  which 
mode  we  are  taught,  that  Christ  was  made  a  curse  for  us,  that 
we,  through  his  cross,  might  be  delivered  from  the  curse  of 
the  law ;  for  this  seems  to  have  been  the  entire  reason  why 
God  pronounced  him  accursed  who  hung  on  a  tree  or  cross, 
that  we  might  understand  that  Christ,  having  been  crucified 
rather  by  divine  [dis^ensatione]  appointment,  than  by  hu- 
man means,  [censeri]  was  reckoned  accursed  for  our  sake,  by 
God  himself. 

Y.  The  death  of  Christ  was  a  true  separation  of  his  soul 


94 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


from  the  body,  both  according  to  its  effects  and  according  to 
place.  It  would  indeed  have  ensued  from  crucifixion,  and  es- 
pecially from  the  breaking  of  his  legs ;  on  which  account,  he 
is  justly  said  to  have  been  killed  by  the  Jews ;  but  death 
l^prceoGCujyata  est]  was  anticipated,  or  previously  undertaken, 
by  Christ  himself,  that  he  might  declare  himself  to  have  re- 
ceived power  from  God  the  Father  to  lay  down  his  soul  and 
life,  and  that  he  died  a  voluntary  death.  The  former  of  these 
seems  to  relate  to  the  confirmation  of  the  truth  which  had 
been  announced  by  him  as  a  prophet,  and  the  latter,  to  [ror 
tionem]  the  circumstances  of  his  priestly  office. 

YI.  The  burial  of  Clirist  has  relation  to  his  certain  death ; 
and  his  remaining  in  the  grave  signifies,  that  he  was  under 
the  dominion  of  death  till  the  hour  of  his  resurrection.  This 
state,  we  think,  was  denoted  by  the  existence  of  Christ  [apud 
inferos]  among  the  dead,  of  which  his  descent  into  hell  [or 
hades]  was  the  commencement,  as  his  interment  was  that  of 
his  remaining  in  the  tomb.  This  interpretation  is  confirmed, 
both  by  the  second  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  (v,) 
and  by  the  consent  of  the  ancient  church,  who,  in  the  symbol 
of  her  belief,  had  only  the  one  or  the  other  of  these  expres- 
sions, either  "He  descended  into  hell,"  or  "He  was  buried." 
Yet  if  any  man  thinks  the  meaning  of  this  article —  "  He  de- 
scended into  hell"  —  to  be  different  from  that  which  we  have 
given,  we  will  not  contradict  his  opinion,  provided  it  be  agree- 
able to  the  Scriptures  and  to  the  analogy  of  iaith. 

YII.  This  state  [of  humiliation]  was  necessary,  both  that 
he  might  yield  obedience  to  his  Father,  and  that,  having  been 
tempted  in  all  things  without  sin,  he  might  be  able  [co?npati\ 
to  sympathize  with  those  who  are  tempted,  and,  lastly,  that 
he  might,  by  suffering,  be  consecrated  as  priest  and  king,  and 
might  enter  into  his  own  glory. 

YHI.  But  this  state  of  glory  and  exhaltation  contains  three 
degrees — his  resurrection,  ascension  into  heaven,  and  sitting 
at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father. 

IX.  The  commencement  of  his  glory  was  his  deliverance 
from  the  bonds  [inferm]  of  the  grave,  and.  his  rising  again, 
from  the  dead,  by  which  his  body,  that  was  dead  and  had 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


95 


been  laid  in  the  sepulclier,  after  the  effects  of  death  had  been 
destroyed  in  it,  was  reunited  to  his  soul,  and  brought  back 
again  to  life,  not  to  this  natural^  but  to  a  spiritualYdQ  ;  though, 
from  [abitndante]  the  overflowing  force  of  natural  life,  he  was 
able  to  perform  its  functions  as  long  as  it  was  necessary  for 
him  to  remain  with  his  disciples  in  the  present  life,  after  hav- 
ing "  arisen  again  from  the  dead,"  [adfidem  resurrectioni  ad- 
hibendum]  to  impart  credibility  to  his  resurrection.  We  as- 
cribe this  resurrection,  not  only  to  the  Father  through  the 
Holy  Spirit,  but  likewise  to  Christ  himself,  who  had  the  pow- 
er of  taking  up  his  life  again. 

X.  Th3  assumption  of  Christ  into  heaven  contains  the  pro- 
gress of  his  exaltation.  For,  as  he  had  finished,  on  earth,  the 
office  enjoined,  and  had  received  a  body — not  a  natural, 
earthly,  corruptible,  fleshly  and  ignominious  body,  but  one 
spiritual,  heavenly,  incorruptible  and  glorious,  and  as  other 
{munia]  duties,  necessary  for  procuring  the  salvation  of  men, 
were  to  be  performed  in  and  concerning  heaven,  it  was  [fas] 
right  and  proper  that  he  should  rise  and  be  exalted  to  heaven, 
and  should  remain  there  until  he  comes  to  judgment. 

From  these  premises^  the  dogma  of  the  papists  concerning 
transubstantiation^  and  that  of  the  Vhiquit avians  concerning 
consubstantiation^  or  the  bodily  presence  of  Christ  in^  with 
and  londer  the  bread^  are  refuted. 

XI.  The  exaltation  of  Christ  to  the  right  hand  of  the  Fa- 
ther is  the  supreme  degree  of  his  exaltation ;  for  it  contains 
the  consummate  glory  and  power  which  have  been  communi- 
cated to  Christ  himself  by  the  Father — glory,  in  his  being 
seated  with  the  Father  in  the  throne  of  majesty,  both  because 
the  regal  office  has  been  conferred  on  him,  with  full  command, 
and  on  earth  above  all  and  over  all  created  things,  and  be- 
cause the  dignity  was  conferred  on  him  of  further  discharging 
[the  duties  of]  the  sacerdotal  office,  in  that  action  which  was 
to  be  performed  in  heaven  by  a  more  sublime  High  Priest 
[factol  constituted  in  heaven  itself. 


96 


JAMES  AKMINTUS. 


XII.  In  relation  to  the  priesthood,  the  state  of  humiliation 
was  necessary ;  because  it  was  the  part  of  Christ  to  appear  in 
heaven  before  the  face  of  his  Father,  sprinkled  with  his  own 
blood,  and  to  intercede  for  believers.  It  was  also  necessary, 
in  relation  to  his  regal  office  ;  because,  (and  in  this  behold  the 
administration  of  the  prophetical  office  placed  in  subordina- 
tion to  the  regal !)  because  [debuit]  it  was  his  duty  to  send 
the  word  and  the  Spirit  from  heaven,  and  to  administer  from 
the  throne  of  his  majesty  all  things  in  the  name  of  his  Fa- 
ther, and  especially  his  church,  by  conferring  on  those  who 
obey  him,  the  blessings  promised  in  his  word  and  sealed  by 
his  Spirit,  and  by  inflicting  evils  on  the  disobedient  after 
they  have  abused  the  patience  of  God  as  long  as  his  justice 
could  bear  it.  Of  this  administration,  the  last  act  will  be 
the  universal  judgment,  for  which  we  are  now  waiting.  "  Come, 
Lord  Jesus 


DISPUTATION^  XXXIX. 

ON  THE  WILI.  AND  COMMAND  OF  GOD  THE  FATHER  AND  OP 
CHRIST,  BY  WHICH  THEY  WILL  AND  COMMAND  THAT  RELIGION 
BE  PERFORMED  TO  THEM  BY  SINFUL  MAN. 

I.  In  ADDITION  to  the  things  that  God  has  done  in  Christ, 
and  Christ  has  done  through  the  command  of  the  Father,  for 
the  redemption  of  mankind,  who  were  lost  through  sin,  by 
which  both  of  them  have  merited  that  [7'eligionem]  religious 
homage  should  be  performed  to  them  by  sinful  man — and  in 
addition  to  the  fact  that  the  Father  has  constituted  Christ  the 
Savior  and  Head,  with  full  power  and  capability  of  saving 
through  the  administration  of  his  priestly  and  regal  offices,  on 
account  of  which  power,  Christ  is  worthy  to  be  worshiped 
with  religious  honors,  and  able  to  reward  his  worshipers,  that 
he  may  not  be  worshiped  in  vain,  it  was  requisite  that  the  will 
of  God  the  Father  and  of  Christ  should  be  subjoined,  by 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


97 


wliich  they  willed  and  commanded  that  religions  worship 
should  be  offered  to  them,  lest  the  performance  of  religion 
should  be  "  will-worship,"  or  superstition.  *• 

II.  It  was  the  will  of  God  that  this  command  should  be 
proposed  through  the  mode  of  a  covenant,  that  is,  through  the 
mutual  stipulation  and  promise  of  the  contracting  parties — ^of 
a  covenant,  indeed,  which  is  never  to  be  disannulled  or  to 
perish,  which  is,  therefore,  denominated  "  the  new  covenant," 
and  is  ratified  by  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  as  Mediator. 

III.  On  this  account,  and  because  Christ  has  been  constitu- 
ted by  the  Father,  a  prince  and  Lord,  with  the  full  possession 
of  all  the  blessings  necessary  to  salvation,  it  is  also  called  "  a 
Testament"  or  "  Will ;"  therefore,  he,  also,  as  the  Testator, 
is  dead,  and  by  his  death,  has  confirmed  the  testamentary 
promise  which  had  previously  been  made,  concerning  the  ob- 
taining of  the  eternal  inheritance  by  the  remission  of  sins. 

lY.  The  stipulation  on  the  part  of  God  and  Christ  is,  that 
God  shall  be  God  and  Father  in  Christ  [to  a  believer]  if  in  the 
name,  and  by  the  command  of  God,  he  acknowledges  Christ 
as  his  Lord  and  Savior,  that  is,  if  he  believe  in  God  through 
Christ,  and  in  Christ,  and  if  he  yield  to  both  of  them  love, 
worship,  honor,  fear,  and  [integraTn]  complete  obedience  as 
prescribed. 

y.  The  promise,  on  the  part,  of  God  the  Father,  and  of 
Christ,  is,  that  God  will  be  the  God  and  Father,  and  that 
Christ  will  be  the  Savior,  (through  the  administration  of.  his 
sacerdotal  and  regal  offices,)  of  those  who  have  faith  in  God 
the  Father,  and  in  Christ,  and  who,  through  faith,  yield  obe- 
dience to  them ;  that  is,  God  the  Father,  and  Christ,  wilL  ac- 
count the  performance  of  religious  duty  to  be  grateful,  and  will 
crown  it  with  a  reward. 

YL  On  the  other  hand,  the  promise  of  sinful  man  is  that 
he  will  believe  in  God  and  in  Christ,  and  through  faith  will 
yield  compliance  or  render  obedience.  But  the  stipulation  is 
that  God  be  willing  to  be  mindful  of  his  compact  and  holy 
[testimonii]  declaration. 

YII.  Christ  intervenes  between  the  two  parties ;  on  the  part 
of  God,  he  proposes  the  stipulation,  and  confirms  the  promise 


98 


JAMES  AEMmms. 


with  liis  blood  ;  he  likewise  works  a  persuasion  in  the  hearts 
of  believers,  and  [ohsignat]  affixes  to  it  his  attesting  seal,  that 
the  promise  will  be  ratified.  But,  on  the  part  of  sinful  man, 
he  promises  [to  the  Father]  that,  by  the  efficacy  of  his  Spirit 
[effecturvm  ut  homo  prcBstet]  he  will  cause  man  to  perform 
the  things  which  he  has  promised  to  his  God ;  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  he  requires  of  the  Father,  that,  mindful  of  his 
own  promise,  he  will  deign  to  bestow  on  \talihns]  those  who 
answer  this  description,  or  believers,  the  forgiveness  of  all 
their  sins,  and  life  eternal.  He  likewise  intervenes,  by  pre- 
senting to  God  the  service  performed  by  man,  and  by  render- 
ing it  grateful  and  acceptable  to  God  through  the  odor  of  his 
own  fragrance. 

YIIL  External  \signaGulci\  seals  or  tokens  are  also  employ- 
ed to  which  the  ancient  Latin  fathers  have  given  the  appella- 
tion of  "  Sacraments,"  and  which,  on  the  part  of  God,  seal 
the  promise  that  has  been  made  by  himself;  but,  on  the  part 
of  men,  they  are  "  the  hand-writing,"  or  bond  of  that  obliga- 
tion by  which  they  had  bound  themselves  that  nothing  may 
in  any  respect  be  wanting  which  seems  to  be  at  all  capable  of 
contributing  to  the  nature  and  relation  of  the  covenant  and 
compact  into  which  the  parties  have  mutually  entered. 

IX.  From  all  these  things,  are  apparant  the  most  sufficient 
perfection  of  the  Christian  religion  and  its  unparalleled  excel- 
lence above  all  other  religions,  though  they  also  be  supposed 
to  be  true.  Its  sufficiency  consists  in  this — both  that  it  dem- 
onstrates the  necessity  of  that  duty  which  is  to  be  performed 
by  sinful  man,  to  be  completely  absolute,  and  on  no  account 
to  be  remissible,  by  which  the  way  is  closed  against  carnal  se- 
ciirify — and  that  it  most  strongly  fortifies  against  despair^  not 
only  sinners,  that  they  may  be  led  to  repentance,  but  also 
those  who  perform  the  duty,  that  they  may,  through  the  cer- 
tain hope  of  future  blessings,  persevere  in  the  course  of  faith 
and  of  good  works  upon  which  they  have  entered.  These 
two  [despair  and  carnal  security]  are  the  greatest  evils  which 
are  to  be  avoided  in  the  whole  of  religion. 

X.  This  is  the  excellence  of  the  Christian  religion  above 
every  other,  that  all  these  things  are  transacted  by  the  inter- 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


99 


veution  of  Christ  onr  mediator,  priest  and  king,  in  which,  nu- 
merous arguments  are  proposed  to  us,  both  for  the  establish- 
ment of  the  necessity  of  its  performance,  and  for  the  confirm- 
ation of  hope,  and  for  the  removal  of  despair,  that  cantiot 
be  shewn  in  any  other  religion.  On  this  account,  therefore, 
it  is  not  wonderful  that  Christ  is  said  to  be  the  wisdom  of  God 
and  the  power  of  God,  manifested  in  the  gospel  for  the  salva- 
tion of  believers. 

COEOLLARY. 

N'o  prayers  and  no  duty,  performed  by  a  sinner,  are  grate- 
ful to  God,  except  with  reference  to  Christ ;  and  yet,  people 
have  acted  properly  in  desiring  and  in  beseecliing  God,  that 
he  would  be  pleased  to  bless  King  Messiah  and  the  progress 
of  his  kingdom. 


DISPUTATIOlsr  XL. 

ON  THE  PREDESTINATION  OF  BELIEVERS. 

I.  As  WE  have  hitherto  treated  on  the  object  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  that  is,  on  Christ  and  God,  and  on  the  formal 
reasons  why  religion  may  be  usefully  performed  to  them,  and 
ought  to  be,  among  which  reasons,  the  last  is  the  will  of  God 
and  his  command  that  prescribes  religion  by  [pactioneiri]  the 
conditions  of  a  covenant ;  and  as  it  will  be  necessary  now  to 
subjoin  to  tliis  a  discourse  on  the  vocation  of  men  to  a  parti- 
cipation in  that  covenant^  it  will  not  be  improper  for  us,  in 
this  place,  to  insert  one  on  the  Predestination^  by  which  God 
determined  to  treat  with  men  according  to  that  prescript,  and 
by  which  he  decreed  to  administer  that  vocation,  and  the  means 
to  it.    First,  concerning  the  former  of  these. 

II.  That  predestination  is  the  decree  of  the  good  pleasure 
of  God,  in  Christ,  by  which  he  determined,  within  himself, 
from  all  eternity,  to  justify  believers,  to  adopt  them,  and  to 


100 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


endow  them  with  eternal  life,  "  to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of 
his  grace,"  and  even  for  the  declaration  of  his  justice. 

III.  This  predestination  is  evangelical,  and,  therefore,  per 
emptorj  and  irrevocable  ;  and,  as  the  gospel  is  purely  gra- 
cious, this  predestination  is  also  gracious,  according  to  the 
benevolent  [affectiirri]  inclination  of  God  in  Christ..  But  that 
grace  excludes  every  cause  which  can  possibly  be  imagined  to 
be  capable  of  having  proceeded  from  man,  and  by  which  God 
may  be  moved  to  make  this  decree. 

lY.  But  we  place  Christ  as  the  foundation  of  this  predesti- 
nation, and  as  the  meritorious  cause  of  those  blessings  which 
have  been  destined  to  believers  by  that  decree.  For  the  love 
with  which  God  loves  men  absolutely  to  salvation,  and  ac- 
cording to  which  he  absolutely  intends  to  bestow  on  them 
eternal  life,  this  love  \710n  est]  has  no  existence  except  in  Jesus 
Christ,  the  Son  of  his  love,  who,  both  by  his  efficacious  communi- 
cation, and  by  his  most  worthy  merits,  is  the  cause  of  salvation, 
and  not  only  the  dispenser  of  recovered  salvation,  but  likewise 
the  solicitor,  obtainer,  and  restorer  of  that  salvation  whic  1 
was  lost.  Therefore,  sufficient  is  not  attributed  to  Christ, 
when  he  is  called  executor  of  the  decree  which  had  been  pre- 
viously made,  and  without  the  consideration  of  him  as  [the 
person]  on  whom  that  decree  is  founded. 

Y.  We  lay  down  a  two-fold  matter  for  this  predestination 
— divine  things,  and  the  persons  to  whom  the  communica- 
tion of  them  has  been  predestinated.  (1.)  Those  divine 
things  are  the  spiritual  blessings  which  usually  receive  the 
appellations  of  grace  and  gloi^y.  (2.)  The  persons  are  the 
faithful,  or  believers  ;  that  is,  they  believe  in  God  who  justi- 
fies the  ungodly,  and  in  Christ  raised  from  the  dead.  But 
faith,  that  is,  the  faith  which  is  on  Christ,  the  mediator  be- 
tween God  and  men,  presupposes  sin,  and  likewise  the  knowl- 
edge or  acknowledgement  of  it. 

YI.  We  place  the  form  of  this  predestination  in  the  internal 
act  itself  of  God,  who  foreordains  to  believers  this  union  with 
Christ  their  Head,  and  [communionerri]  a  participation  in  his 
benefits.  But  we  place  the  end  in  "  the  praise  of  the  glory  of 
the  grace  of  God and  as  this  grace  is  the  cause  of  that 


PKIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


101 


decree,  it  is  equitable  that  it  should  be  celebrated  by  [ilia] 
gloiy,  though  God,  by  using  it,  has  rendered  it  illustrious  and 
glorious.  In  this  place,  too,  occurs  the  mention  of  justice 
itself,  as  that  by  the  intervention  of  which  Christ  was  given  as 
mediator,  and  faith  in  him  was  required  ;  because,  without 
*this  mediator,  God  has  neither  willed  to  shew  mercy,  nor  to 
save  men  without  faith  in  him. 

yil.  But,  as  this  decree  of  predestination  is  according  to 
election,  which  necessarily  includes  reprobation,  we  must  like- 
wise advert  to  it.  As  opposed  to  election,  therefore,  we  define 
reprobation  to  be  the  decree  of  God's  anger  or  of  his  severe 
will,  by  which,  from  all  eternity,  he  determined  to  condemn 
to  eternal  death  all  unbelievers  and  impenitent  persons,  for 
the  declaration  of  his  power  and  anger  ;  yet  so,  that  unbeliev- 
ers are  visited  with  this  punishment,  not  only  on  account  of 
"unbelief,  but  likewise  on  account  of  other  sins  from  which  they 
might  have  been  delivered  through  faith  in  Christ. 

YIII.  To  both  these  is  severally  subjoined  the  execution  of 
each  ;  the  acts  of  which  are  performed  in  that  order  in  which 
they  have  been  ordained  by  God  in  the  decree  itself ;  and  the 
objects,  both  of  the  decree  and  of  its  execution,  are  com|)leteiy 
the  same  and  uniform,  or  they  are  invested  with  the  same  for- 
mal reason,  though  they  are  considered  in  the  decree^  as  in  the 
mind  of  God,  through  the  understanding,  but,  iit  the  execution 
of  it,  as  such,  actually  in  existence. 

IX.  This  predestination  is  the  foundation  of  Christianity,  of 
salvation,  and  of  the  certainty  of  salvation ;  and  St.  Paul  treats 
upon  it  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  (viii,  28-30,)  in  the  ninth 
and  following  chapters  of  the  same  epistle,  and  in  the  first 
chapter  of  that  to  the  Ephesians. 


102 


JAMES  AKMEmJS. 


DISPUTATIOIT  XLI. 

ON  THE  PEEDESTINATION  OF  THE  MEANS  TO  THE  END. 

I.  After  we  have  finisbed  onr  discussion  on  the  predestina- 
tion b}^  which  God  has  determined  the  necessity  of  faith  in 

.  himself  and  in  Christ,  for  the  obtaining  of  salvation,  according 
to  which  faith  is  prescribed  to  be  performed  as  the  bounden 
duty  of  man  to  God  and  Christ ;  it  follows,  that  we  treat  on 
the  predestination  by  which  God  determines  to  administer  the 
means  to  faith. 

II.  For,  as  that  act  of  faith  is  not  in  the  power  of  a  natural, 
carnal,  [animcclis]  sensual,  and  sinful  man,  and  as  no  one  can 
perform  this  act  except  through  the  grace  of  God,  but  as  all 
the  grace  of  God  is  administered  according  to  the  will  of 
God — that  v/ill  which  he  has  had  within  himself  from  all 
eternity — for  it  is  an  internal  act,  therefore,  sonia-^certain  pre- 
destination must  be  preconceived  in  the  mind  and  will^TGod, 
according  to  which  iie  dispenses  that  grace,  or  the  means 
to  it. 

III.  But  we  can  define  this  predestination,  that  it  is  the 
eternal  decree  of  God,  by  which  [constiluit]  he  has  wisely  and 
justly  resolved,  within  himself,  to  administer  those  means 
which  are  necessary  and  sufficient  to  produce  faith  in  [the 
hearts  of]  sinful  men,  in  such  a  manner  as  he  knows  to  be 
comportable  with  liis  mercy  and  with  his  severity,  to  the  glory 
of  his  name  and  to  the  salvation  of  believers. 

lY.  The  object  of  this  predestination  is,  both  the  means  of 
producing  this  faith,  and  the  sinful  men  to  whom  he  has  de- 
creed either  to  give  or  not  to  give  this  faith,  as  the  object  of 
the  predestination  discussed  in  the  preceding  dis23utation  was 
faith  itself,  existing  in  the  preconception  of  the  mind  of  God. 

Y.  The  antecedent,  or  inly  moving  cause,,  impelling  to  make 
the  decree,  is  not  only  the  mercy  of  God,  but  also  his  severity. 
But  his  wisdom  prescribes  the  mode  which  his  justice  admin- 
isters, that  what  is  justly  due  to  mercy  may  be  attributed  to 
it,  and  tliat,  in  the  mean  time,  regard  may  be  bad  to  severity, 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


103 


according  to  which  God  threatens  that  he  will  send  a  famine 
of  the  word  on  the  earth. 

yi.  The  matter  is  the  conceded  or  the  denied  dispensation 
of  the  means.  The  form  is  the  ordained  dispensation  itself, 
according  to  which  it  is  granted  to  some  men  and  denied  to 
others,  or  it  is  granted  or  denied  on  this  and  not  on  that 
condition. 

YIL  The  end  for  the  sake  of  which,  and  the  end  which,  are 
conjoined  to  the  administration  itself  at  the  very  same  mo- 
ment, and  are  the  declaration  of  the  mercy  of  God,  and  of  his 
severity,  wisdom  and  justice.  The  end  [cui~]  for  w^hich  it  was 
intended,  and  which  follows  from  the  administration,  is  the 
salvation  of  believers.  The  results  are,  the  condemnation  of 
unbelievers,  and  the  still  more  grievous  condemnation  of  some 
men. 

yill.  But  the  proper  and  peculiar  means  destined,  are  the 
word  and  Spirit ;  to  which,  also,  may  be  joined  the  good  and 
the  evil  things  of  this  natural  life,  which  God  employs  for  the 
same  end,  and  of  the  nature  and  efScacy  of  which  we  shall 
ti*eat  in  the  disputation  on  Vocation^  where  they  are  used. 

IX.  To  these  means,  we  attribute  two  epithets,  "  necessity" 
and  "  sufficiency,"  (§  III,)  which  belong  to  them  according  to 
the  will  and  nature  of  God,  and  which  we  also  join  together. 
(1.)  Necessity  is  in  them  ;  because,  without  them,  a  sinner 
cannot  conceive  faith.  (2.)  Sufficiency  also  is  in  them ;  be- 
cause they  are  employed  in  vain,  if  they  be  not  sufficient ; 
yet  we  do  not  account  it  necessary  to  place  this  sufficiency  in 
the  first  moment  in  which  they  begin  to  be  used,  but  in  the 
entire  progress  and  completion. 

X.  God  destines  these  means  to  no  persons  on  account  of, 
or  according  to,  their  own  merits,  but  through  mere  grace 
alone ;  and  he  denies  them  to  no  one,  except  justly,  on  account 
of  previous  transgressions. 


104 


JAMES  AEMESnUS. 


DISPUTATION  XLIL 

ON  THE  VOCATION  OF  SINFUL  MEN  TO  CHEIST,  AND  TO  A 
PAKTICIPATION  OF  SALVATION  IN  HIM. 

I.  The  vocation  or  calling  to  the  communion  of  Christ  and 
its  benefits,  is  the  gracious  act  of  God,  by  which,  through  the 
word  and  his  Spirit,  he  calls  forth  sinful  men,  [reos]  subject 
to  condemnation  and  placed  under  the  dominion  of  sin,  from 
the  condition  [animalis~\  of  natural  life,  ?jid  out  of  the  defile- 
ments and  corruptions  of  this  world,  to  obtain  a  supernatural 
life  in  Christ  through  repentance  and  faith,  that  they  may  be 
united  in  him,  as  their  head  destined  and  ordained  by  God, 
and  may  enjoy  [commimioneni]  the  ]3articipation  of  his  bene- 
fits, to  the  glory  of  God  and  to  their  own  salvation. 

II.  The  efficient  cause  of  this  vocation  is  God  and  the  Father 
in  the  Son ;  the  Son,  also,  himself,  as  constituted  Mediator 
and  King  by  God  the  Father,  calls  men  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  as 
he  is  the  Spirit  of  God  given  to  the  mediator,  and  the  Spirit 
of  Christ,  the  King  and  the  Head  of  his  church,  by  whom  the 
Father  and  the  Son  both  "  work  hitherto."  But  this  vocation 
is  so  administered  by  the  Spirit,  that  he  also,  is  properly  de- 
nominated the  author  of  it.  For  he  appoints  bishoj^s  in  the 
church,  he  sends  teachers,  he  furnishes  them  with  gifts,  he 
grants  them  divine  aid,  and  imparts  force  and  authority  to  the 
word. 

III.  The  antecedent  or  inly  moving  cause  is  tbe  grace,  mercy 
and  philanthropy  of  God,  by  which  he  is  inclined  to  succor 
the  misery  of  sinful  man,  and  to  bestow  blessedness  upon  him. 
But  the  disposing  cause  is,  the  wisdom  and  the  justice  of  God, 
by  which  he  knows  the  method  by  which  it  is  proper  for  this 
vocation  to  be  administered,  and  by  which  he  wills  to  dispense 
it  as  it  is  proper  and  right.  From  this,  arises  the  decree  of 
his  will  concerning  its  administration  and  mode. 

lY.  The  instrumental  cause  of  vocation  is  the  word  of  God^ 
administered  by  the  aid  of  man,  either  by  preaching  or  by 
writing;  and  this  is  the  ordinary  instrument;  or  it  is  the 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS.  ^105 

divine  word  immediately  proposed  bj  God,  inwardly  to  the 
mind  and  will,  without  human  [operam]  aid  or  endeavor ;  and 
this  is  extraordinary.  The  word  employed,  in  both  these 
cases,  is  that  both  of  the  law  and  of  the  gospel,  subordinate  to 
each  other  in  their  separate  services. 

Y.  The  matter  of  vocation  is  men  constituted  in  their  [ani- 
malis]  sensual  life,  as  worldly,  natural,  sensual,  and  sinful. 

YI.  The  boundary  from  which  they  are  called,  is,  both  the 
state  of  sensual  or  natural  life,  and  that  of  sin  and  of  misery 
on  account  of  sin ;  that  is,  from  condemnation  and  guilt,  and 
afterwards  from  the  bondage  and  dominion  of  sin. 

YII.  The  boundary  to  which  they  are  called,  is,  the  com- 
munication of  grace,  or  of  supernatural  good,  and  of  every 
spiritual  blessing,  the  plenitude  of  which  resides  in  Christ — 
also  their  power  and  force,  as  well  as  the  inclination  to  com>- 
municate  them. 

YIII.  The  proximate  end  of  vocation  is,  that  men  may  lov^ 
fear,  honor  and  worship  God  and  Christ — ^may  in  righteous- 
ness and  true  holiness,  according  to  the  command  of  the  word 
of  God,  render  obedience  to  God  who  calls  them,  and  may, 
by  this  means,  make  their  calling  and  election  sure. 

IX.  The  remote  end  is  the  salvation  of  those  who  are  called, 
and  the  glory  of  God  and  of  Christ  who  calls  ;  both  of  which 
are  placed  in  the  union  of  God  and  man.  For  as  God  unites 
himself  to  man,  and  declares  himself  to  be  prepared  to  unite 
himself  to  him,  he  makes  his  own  glory  illustrious  ;  and,  aiB 
man  is  united  to  God,  he  obtains  salvation. 

X.  This  vocation  is  both  external  and  internal.  The  exter- 
nal vocation  is  by  the  ministry  of  men  propounding  the  word> 
The  internal  vocation  is  through  the  operation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  illuminating  and  affecting  the  heart,  that  attention  may 
be  pai  d  to  those  things  which  are  spoken,  and  that  \^fides\ 
credence  may  be  given  to  the  word.  From  the  concurrence 
of  both  these,  arises  the  efficacy  of  vocation. 

XL  But  that  distribution  is  not  of  a  genus  into  its  species^ 
but  of  a  whole  into  its  parts ;  that  is,  the  distribution  of  the 
whole  vocation  into  partial  acts  concurring  together  to  one 
result,  which  is  obedience  yielded  to  the  vocation.  Hence, 
8  VOL.  n. 


106 


JAMES  AEMUmiS. 


the  company  of  those  who  are  called  and  who  answer  to  the 
call,  is  denominated  "  a  Chm*ch." 

Xn.  The  accidental  [per  accidens]  issue  of  vocation  is,  the 
rejection  of  the  doctrine  of  grace,  contempt  of  the  divine 
counsel,  and  resistance  manifested  against  the  Holy  Spirit,  of 
which  the  proper  and  fer  se  cause  is,  the  wickedness  and  hard- 
ness of  the  human  heart ;  and  to  this  not  unfrequentlj  is 
addedthe  just  judgment  of  God,  avenging  the  contempt  shewn 
to  his  word,  from  which  arise  blindness  of  riiind,  hardening  ot 
the  heart,  and  a  delivering  up  to  a  reprobate  [sensum]  mind, 
and  to  the  power  of  Satan. 


DISPUTATION-  Xmi. 

ON  THE  BEPENTAlfCE  BY  WHICH  MEN  ANSWER  TO  THE  DIVINB 
VOCATION. 

I.  As,  IN  the  matter  of  salvation,  it  has  pleased  God  to  treat 
with  man  bj  \rationeni\  the  method  of  a  covenant,  that  is,  by 
a  stipulation,  or  a  demand  and  a  promise,  and  as  even  voca- 
tion has  regard  to  a  participation  in  the  covenant ;  it  is  insti- 
tuted on  both  sides  and  separately,  that  man  may  perform  the 
requisition  or  command  of  God,  by  which  be  may  obtain  [the 
fulfillment  of]  his  promise.  But  this  is  the  mutual  relation 
between  these  two — the  promise  is  tantamount  to  an  argu- 
ment, which  God  employs,  that  he  may  obtain  from  man  that 
which  he  demands  ;  and  the  compliance  with  the  demand,  on 
the  other  hand,  is  the  condition,  without  which  man  cannot 
obtain  what  has  been  promised  by  God,  and  through  [the 
performance  of]  which  he  most  assuredly  obtains  the  promise. 

II.  Hence,  it  is  apparent  that  the  first  of  all  which  accepts 
this  vocation  is  the  faith,  by  which  a  man  believes  that,  if  he 
complies  with  the  requisition,  he  will  enjoy  the  promise,  but 
that  if  he  does  not  comply  with  it,  [caritururri]  he  will  not  be 
put  in  jDOssession  of  the  things  promised,  nay,  that  the  contrary 
«vils  will  be  inflicted  on  him,  according  to  the  nature  of  the 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


107 


divine  covenant,  in  which  there  is  no  promise  without  a  pun- 
ishment opposed  to  it.  This  faith  is  the  foundation  on  which 
rests  the  obedience  that  is  to  be  yielded  to  God ;  and  it  is, 
therefore,  the  foundation  of  religion. 

III.  But  divines  generally  place  three  parts  in  this  obedi- 
ence. The  first  is  repentance,  for  it  is  the  calling  of  sinners 
to  righteousness.  The  second  is  faith  in  Christ,  and  in  God 
through  Christ ;  for  vocation  is  made  through  the  gospel, 
which  is  the  word  of  faith.  The  third  is  the  observance  of 
God's  commands,  in  which  consists  holiness  of  life,  to  which 
believers  are  called,  and  without  which  no  man  shall  see  God. 

lY.  Repentance  is  [dolor]  grief  or  sorrow  on  account  of  sins 
known  and  acknowledged,  the  debt  of  death  contracted  by  sin, 
and  on  account  of  the  slavery  of  sin,  with  a  desire  to  be  de- 
livered. Hence,  it  is  evident,  that  three  things  concur  in 
penitence — the  fii-st  as  an  antecedent,  the  second  as  a  conse- 
quence, and  the  third  as  properly  and  most  fully  comprising 
its  nature. 

Y.  That  which  is  tantamount  to  an  antecedent  is  the  knowl- 
edge or  acknowledgment  of  sin.  This  consists  of  a  two-fold 
knowledge :  (1.)  A  general  knowledge  by  which  is  known 
what  is  sin  universally  and  according  to  the  prescript  of  the 
law.  (2.)  A  particular  knowledge,  by  which  it  is  acknowl- 
edged that  sin  had  been  committed,  both  from  a  recollection 
of  the  bad  deeds  perpetrated  and  of  the  good  omitted,  and 
from  the  examination  of  them  according  to  the  law.  This  ac- 
knowledgment, has,  united  with  it,  a  consciousness  of  a  two- 
fold demerit,  of  damnation  or  death,  and  of  the  slavery  of  sin  ; 
"  for  the  wages  of  sin  is  death  ;"  and  "  he  who  sins  is  the  slave 
of  sin."  This  acknowledgement  is  either  internal,  and  made 
in  the  mind,  or  it  is  external,  and  receives  the  appellation  of 
"  confession." 

YI.  That  which  intimately  comprises  the  nature  of  repent- 
ance is,  sorrow  on  account  of  sin  committed,  and  of  its  de- 
merit, which  is  so  much  the  deeper,  as  the  acknowledgment 
of  sin  is  clearer,  and  more  copious.  It  is  also  produced  from 
this  acknowledmentby  means  of  a  two-fold  fear  of  punishment: 
(1.)  A  fear  not  only  of  bodily  and  temporal  punishment,  but 


108  JAMES  ARMINIUS. 

likewise  of  that  which  is  spiritual  and  eternal.  (2.)  The  fear 
of  God,  by  which  men  are  afraid  of  the  judgment  of  such  a 
good  and  just  being,  whom  they  have  offended  by  their  sins. 
This  fear  may  be  correctly  called  "initial;"  and  we  believe 
that  it  has  some  hope  annexed  to  it. 

YII.  That  which  follows  as  a  consequence,  is  the  desire  of 
deliverance  from  sin,  that  is,  from  the  condemnation  of  sin 
and  from  its  dominion,  which  desire  is  so  much  the  more  in- 
tense, by  how  much  the  greater  is  the  acknowledgment  of  mis- 
ery and  sorrow  on  account  of  sin. 

YIII.  The  cause  of  this  repentance  is,  God  by  bis  word  and 
Spirit  in  Christ.  For  it  is  a  repentance  tending  not  to  des- 
pair, but  to  salvation  ;  but  such  it  cannot  be,  except  with  re- 
spect to  Christ,  in  whom,  alone,  the  sinner  can  obtain  deliver- 
ance from  the  condemnation  and  dominion  of  sin.  But  the 
word  which  he  uses  at  the  beginning  is  the  word  of  the  law, 
yet  not  under  the  legal  condition  peculiar  to  the  law,  but  un- 
der that  which  is  annexed  to  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  of 
which  the  first  word  is,  that  deliverance  is  declared  to  peni- 
tents. The  Spirit  of  God  may,  not  improperly,  be  denomina- 
ted "  the  Spirit  of  Christ,"  as  he  is  Mediator ;  and  it  first 
urges  a  man  by  the  word  of  the  law,  and  then  shews  him  the 
grace  of  the  gospel.  The  connection  of  the  word  of  the  law 
and  that  of  the  gospel,  which  is  thus  skillfully  made,  removes 
all  self-security,  and  forbids  despair,  which  are  the  two  pests 
of  religion  and  of  souls.-  • 

IX.  We  do  not  acknowledge  satisfaction,  which  the  papists 
make  to  be  the  third  part  of  repentance,  though  we  do  not 
deny  that  the  man  who  is  a  real  penitent  will  endeavor  to 
make  satisfaction  to  his  neighbor  against  whom  he  owns  that 
he  has  sinned,  and  to  the  church  that  he  has  injured  [scandalo] 
by  the  offence.  But  satisfaction  can  by  no  means  be  rendered 
to  God,  on  the  part  of  man,  by  repentance,  sorrow,  contrition, 
almsgiving,  or  by  the  voluntary  susception  and  infliction  of 
punishments.  If  such  a  course  were  prescribed  by  God,  the 
consciences  of  men  must  necessarily  be  tormented  with  the 
continual  anguish  of  a  threatening  hell,  not  less  than  if  no 
promise  of  grace  had  been  made  to  sinners.    But  God  consid- 


PKIVATB  DISPUTATIONS. 


109 


ers  this  repentance,  which  we  have  described,  if  it  be  true,  to 
be  worthy  of  a  gracious  deliverance  from  sin  and  misery  ;  and 
it  has  faith  as  a  consequence,  on  which  we  will  treat  in  the 
subsequent  disputation. 

COROLLARY. 

Repentance  is  not  a  sacrament,  either  with  regard  to  itself, 
or  with  regard  to  its  external  tokens. 


DISPUTATION  XLIY. 

ON  FAITH  IN  GOD  AND  CHRIST. 

I.  In  the  preceding  disputation,  we  have  treated  on  the 
first  part  of  that  obedience  which  is  yielded  to  the  vocation  ot 
God.  The  second  part  now  follows,  which  is  called  "  the  obe- 
dience of  faith." 

II.  Faith,  generally,  is  the  assent  given  to  truth ;  and  di- 
vine faith  is  that  which  is  given  to  truth  divinely  revealed. 
The  foundation  on  which  divine  faith  rests  is  two-fold — the 
one  external  and  out  of  or  beyond  the  mind — the  other  inter- 
nal and  in  the  mind.  (1.)  The  external  foundation  of  faith 
is  the  very  veracity  of  God  lenunciantis]  who  makes  the  dec- 
laration, and  who  can  declare  nothing  that  is  false.  (2.)  The 
internal  foundation  of  faith  is  two-fold — both  the  general 
[notio]  idea  by  which  we  know  that  God  is  true — and  [notitia] 
the  knowledge  by  which  we  know  that  it  is  the  word  of  God. 
Faith  is  also  two-fold,  according  to  the  mode  of  revelation, 
being  both  legal  and  evangelical,  of  which  the  latter  comes 
Tinder  our  present  consideration,  and  tends  to  God  and  Christ. 

III.  Evangelical  faith  is  an  assent  of  the  mind,  produced 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  ^through  the  gospel,  in  sinners,  who, 
through  the  law,  know  and  acknowledge  their  sins,  and  are 
penitent  on  account  of  them,  by  which  they  are  noi  only  fully 
persuaded  within  themselves  that  Jesus  Christ  has  been  con- 


110 


JAMES  AEMDOUB. 


stituted  by  God  the  author  of  salvation  to  those  who  obey 
him,  and  that  he  is  their  own  Savior  if  thej  have  believed  in 
him,  and  by  which  they  also  believe  in  him  as  such,  and 
through  him  on  God  as  the  benevolent  Father  in  him,  to 
the  salvation  of  believers  and  to  the  glory  of  Christ  and 
God. 

lY.  The  object  of  faith  is  not  only  the  God  and  Father  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  likewise  Christ  himself  who  is  here 
constituted  by  God  the  author  of  salvation  to  those  that  obey 
him. 

Y.  The  form  is  the  assent  that  is  given  to  an  object  of  this 
description ;  which  assent  is  not  acquired  by  [discursuml  a 
course  of  reasoning  from  principles  known  by  nature  ;  but  it 
is  an  assent  infused  above  the  order  of  nature,  which,  yet,  is 
confirmed  and  increased  by  the  daily  exercises  of  prayers  and 
mortification  of  the  flesh,  and  by  the  practice  of  good  works. 
Knowledge  is  antecedent  to  faith  ;  for  the  Son  of  God  is  be- 
held before  a  sinner  believes  on  him.  But  [Jiducia]  trust  or 
confidence  is  conse  ,uent  to  it ;  for,  through  faith,  confidence 
is  placed  in  Christ,  and  through  him  in  God. 

YI.  The  author  of  faith  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  the  Son 
sends  from  the  Father,  as  his  advocate  and  {yicariuiri]  sub- 
stitute, who  may  manage  his  cause  in  the  world  and  against 
it.  The  instrument  is  the  gospel,  or  the  word  of  faith,  con- 
taining [sensum]  the  meaning  concerning  God  and  Christ 
•  ;  ♦  /  which  the  Spirit  proposes  to  the  understanding,  and  of  which 
[persuadet]  he  there  works  a  persuasion. 

YII.  The  subject  [in  quo]  in  which  it  resides,  is  the  mind, 
not  only  as  it  acknowledges  this  object  to  be  true,  but  like- 
wise to  be  good,  which  the  word  of  the  gospel  declares. 
Wherefore,  it  belongs  not  only  to  the  theoretical  understand- 
ing, but  likewise  to  [affectivuin]  that  of  the  affections,  which 
is  practical. 

YIII.  The  subject  [c7ii]  to  which  [it  is  directed],  or  the  ob- 
ject about  which  [it  is  occupied],  is  sinful  man,  acknowledging 
his  sins,  and  penitent  on  account  of  them.  For  this  faith  is 
necessary  for  salvation  to  him  who  believes  ;  but  it  is  unne- 
cessary to  one  who  is  not  a  sinner ;  and,  therefore,  no  one, 


PHrVATE  DISPUTATIONS- 


111 


except  a  sinner,  can  know  or  acknowledge  Christ  for  his  Sa- 
vior, for  he  is  the  Savior  of  sinners.  The  end,  which  we 
intend  for  our  own  benefit,  is  Salvation  in  its  nature.  But 
the  chief  end  is  the  glorj  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ. 

COROLLAET. 

"  Was  the  faith  of  the  patriarchs  under  the  covenants  of 
promise,  the  same  as  ours  under  the  'New  Testament,  with 
regard  to  its  substance  ?"    We  answer  in  the  affirmative. 


DISPUTATIOlSr  XLY. 

ON"  THE  UNION  OF  BELIEVEES   WITH  CHRIST. 

I.  As  Christ  is  constituted  bj  the  Father  the  Savior  of 
those  that  believe,  who,  being  exalted  in  heaven  to  the  right 
hand  of  the  Father,  communicates  to  believers  all  those  bles- 
sings which  he  has  solicited  from  the  Father,  and  which  he 
has  obtained  by  his  obedience  and  [actu]  pleading,  but  as 
[communicatio]  the  participation  of  blessings  cannot  be 
through  communication,  unless  where  there  has  previously 
been  [ordinatd]  an  orderly  and  suitable  union  between  him 
who  communicates  and  those  to  whom  such  communications 
are  made,  it  is,  therefore,  necessary  for  us  to  treat,  in  the  first 
place,  upon  the  union  of  Christ  with  us,  on  account  of  its  be- 
ing the  primary  and  immediate  effect  of  that  faith  by  which 
men  believ^e  in  him  as  the  only  Savior. 

II.  The  truth  of  this  thing,  and  the  necessity  of  this  union, 
are  intimated  by  the  names  with  which  Christ  is  signally  dis- 
tinguished in  a  certain  relation  to  believers.  Such  are  the  ap- 
pellations of  head^  spouse^  foundation^  vine^  and  others  of  a 
similar  kind ;  from  which,  on  the  other  hand,  believers  are 
called  members  in  his  hodi/,  which  is  the  entire  church  of  be- 
lievers, the  sjpouse  of  Christy  lively  stones  huilt  on  him^  and 
young  shoots  or  hranches.    By  these  epithets,  is  signified 


112 


JAMES  AKMINnJS. 


the  closest  and  most  intimate  union  between  Christ  and  be- 
lievers. 

III.  We  may  define  or  describe  it  to  be  that  spiritual  and 
most  strict  and  therefore  mystically  essential  conjunction,  by 
which  believers,  being  immediately  connected,  by  God  the 
Father  and  J esus  Christ  through  the  Spirit  of  Christ  and  of 
God,  with  Christ  himself,  and  through  Christ  with  God,  be- 
come one  with  him  and  with  the  Father,  and  are  made  parta- 
kers of  all  his  blessings,  to  their  own  salvation  and  the  glory 
of  Christ  and  of  God. 

lY.  The  author  of  this  union  is  not  only  God  the  Father, 
who  has  constituted  his  Son  the  head  of  the  church,  endued 
him  with  the  Spirit  without  measure,  and  unites  believers  to 
his  Son  ;  but  also  Christ,  who  communicates  to  believers  that 
Spirit  whom  he  obtained  from  the  Father,  that,  [adhcBrentes] 
cleaving  to  him  by  faith,  they  may  be  one  Spirit.  The  ad- 
ministrators are  prophets,  apostles  and  other  dispensers  of  the 
mysteries  of  God,  who  lay  Christ  as  the  foundation,  and  bring 
bis  spouse  to  him. 

Y.  The  parties  to  be  united  are,  (1.)  Christ,  whom  God  the 
Father  has  constituted  the  head,  the  spouse,  the  foundation, 
the  vine,  &c.,  and  to  whom  he  has  given  all  perfection,  with  a 
plenary  power  and  command  to  communicate  it ;  (2.)  And 
sinful  man,  and  therefore  destitute  of  the  glory  of  God,  yet  a 
believer,  and  owning  Christ  for  his  Savior. 

YI.  The  bond  of  union  must  be  considered  both  on  the 
part  of  believers,  and  on  the  part  of  God  and  Christ.  (1.) 
On  the  part  of  believers,  it  is  faith  in  Christ  and  God,  by 
which  Christ  is  given  to  dwell  in  our  hearts.  (2.)  On  the 
part  of  God  and  Christ,  it  is  the  Spirit  of  both,  who  flows 
from  Christ  as  the  constituted  head,  into  believei'S,  that  he 
may  unite  them  to  him  as  members. 

YII.  The  form  of  union  is  a  compacting  and  joining  to- 
gether, which  is  orderly,  harmonious,  and  in  everj^  part  agree- 
ing with  itself  by  joints  fitly  [suhministratas']  supplied,  ac- 
cording to  the  measure  of  the  gifts  of  Christ.  This  conjunc- 
tion receives  various  appellations,  according  to  tlie  various 
similitudes  which  we  have  already  adduced.   With  respect  to 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


113 


a  foundation  and  a  house  built  upon  it,  it  is  [inced^'Jicatio]  a 
being  built  up  into  [a  spiritual  house].  With  respect  to  a 
husband  and  wife,  it  is  a  participation  of  flesh  and  bones  ;  or, 
it  is  flesh  of  the  flesh  of  Christ,  and  bone  of  his  bones.  With 
respect  to  a  vine  and  its  branches,  or  to  an  olive  tree  and  its 
boughs,  it  is  an  ingrafting  and  implanting. 

YIII.  The  proximate  and  immediate  end  is  the  communion 
of  the  parts  united  among  themselves  ;  this,  also,  is  an  efi*ect 
consequent  upon  that  union,  but  actively  understood,  as  it 
flows  from  Christ,  and  positively,  as  it  flows  into  believers, 
and  is  received  by  them.  The  cause  of  this  is,  that  the  rela- 
tion is  that  of  disquiparency,  where  the  foundation  is  Christ, 
who  possesses  all  things,  and  stands  in  need  of  nothing  ;  the 
term,  or  boundary,  is  the  believer  in  want  of  all  things.  The 
remote  end  is  the  external  salvation  of  believers,  and  the  glory 
of  God  and  Christ. 

IX.  But  not  only  does  Christ  communicate  his  blessings  to 
the  believers,  who  are  united  to  him,  but  he  likewise  consid- 
ers, on  account  of  this  most  intimate  and  close  union,  that  the 
good  things  bestowed,  and  the  evils  inflicted  on  believers,  are 
also  done  to  himself.  Hence,  arise  commiseration  for  his 
children,  and  certain  succor,  but  anger  against  those  who  af- 
flict, which  abides  upon  them  unless  they  repent,  and  benefi- 
cence towards  those  who  have  given  even  a  draught  of  cold 
water,  in  the  name  of  Christ,  to  one  of  his  followers. 


DISPUTATIOISr  XLYI. 

ON  THE  COMMUNION  OF  BELIEVERS  WITH  CHRIST,  AND  PARTICU- 
LARLY WITH  HIS  DEATH. 

I.  The  union  of  believers  with  Christ  tends  to  communion 
with  him,  which  contains,  in  itself,  every  end  and  fruit  of 
union,  and  flows  immediately  from  the  union  itself. 

II.  Communion  with  Christ  is  that  by  which  believers, 
when  united  to  him,  have,  in  common  with  himself  all  those 


114 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


things  which  belong  to  him ;  yet  the  distinction  is  preserved, 
which  exists  between  the  head  and  the  members,  between  him 
who  communicates,  and  them  who  are  made  partakers,  be- 
ween  him_  who  sanctifieth,  and  those  who  are  sanctified. 

III.  This  com  munion  must,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  be 
considered  in  two  views,  for  it  is  either  a  communion  of  his 
death,  or  of  his  life  ;  because  Christ  must  be  thus  considered 
in  two  relations — -either  according  to  the  state  in  tlie  body  of 
his  flesh,  which  was  crucified,  dead,  and  buried,  or,  according 
to  his  glorious  state  and  the  new  life  to  which  he  was  raised 
up  again. 

ly.  The  communion  of  his  death  is  that  by  which,  being 
planted  together  in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  participate 
of  his  power,  and  of  all  the  benefits  which  flow  from  his 
death. 

Y.  This  planting  together  is  the  crucifixion,  [inortificatio] 
the  death  and  the  burial  of  "  our  old  man,"  or  of  "  the  body  of 
sin,"  in  and  with  the  body  of  the  flesh  of  Christ.  These  are  the 
degrees  by  which  the  body  of  the  flesh  of  Christ  is  abolish- 
ed ;  that  may  also  in  its  own  measure,  be  called  the  body  of 
sin,"  so  far  as  God  has  made  Christ  to  be  sin  for  us,  and  has 
given  him  to  bear  our  sins,  in  his  own  body,  on  the  tree. 

YL  The  strength  and  efiicacy  of  the  death  of  Christ  con- 
sist in  the  abolishing  of  sin  and  death,  and  of  the  law,  which 
is  "  the  hand-writins:  that  is  as^ainst  us  :"  and  the  strens^th  or 
force  of  sin  is  that  by  which  sin  kills  us. 

YII.  The  efiicacious  benefits  of  the  death  of  Christ  which 
believers  enjoy  through  communion  with  it,  are  principally 
the  following  :  The  first  is  the  removal  of  the  eurse^  which 
we  had  [mm^^]  deserved  through  sin.  This  includes,  or  has 
connected  with  it,  our  reconciliation  with  God,  perpetual  re- 
demption, remission  of  sins,  and  justification. 

YIII.  The  SECOND  is  deliverance  from  the  dominion  and 
slavery  of  sin^  that  sin  may  no  longer  exercise  its  power  in 
our  crucified,  dead  and  buried  body  of  sin,  to  obtain  its  de- 
sires by  the  obedience  which  we  have  usually  yielded  to  it  in 
our  body  of  sin,  according  to  the  old  man. 

IX.  The  THiED  is  deliverance  from  the  law,  both  as  it  is 


PEIYATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


115 


"the  hand-writing  which  was  against  us,"  consisting  of  cere- 
monial institutions,  and  as  it  is  the  rigid  exactor  of  what  is 
due  from  us,  and  useless  and  ineiScacious  as  it  is  on  account 
of  our  flesh,  and  the  body  of  sin,  according  to  which  we  were 
carnal,  though  it  was  spiritual,  and  as  sin,  hj  its  w^ickedness 
and  perversity,  abused  the  law  itself  to  seduce  and  kill  us. 


DISPUTATION^  XLYIT 

ON  THE  COMMUNION  OF  BELIEVERS  WITH  CHEIST  IN  EEGAED  TO 

HIS  LIFE. 

I.  Communion  with  the  life  of  Christ  is  that  by  which,  be- 
ing ingrafted  into  him  by  a  conformity  to  his  life,  we  become 
partakers  of  the  whole  [vim]  power  of  his  life,  and  of  all  the 
benefits  which  flow  from  it. 

II.  Our  conformity  to  the  life  of  Christ,  is  either  that  of 
the  present  life,  or  of  that  which  is  future.  (1.)  That  of  the 
present  life  is  the  raising  of  us  up  into  a  new  life,  and  our  [in 
ccelestibas  collocatio]  being  seated,  with  regard  to  the  Spirit, 
"in  heavenly  places"  in  Christ  our  head.  (2.)  That  of  the  life 
to  come  is  our  resurrection  into  a  new  life  according  to  the 
body,  and  our  being  elevated  to  heavenly  places  with  regard 
to  the  entire  man. 

III.  Hence,  our  conformity  to  Christ  is  according  to  the 
same  two-fold  relation :  in  this  life,  it  is  our  resurrection  to 
newness  of  spiritual  life,  and  our  conversation  in  heaven  ac- 
cording to  the  Spirit ;  after  the  present  life,  it  is  the  resurrec- 
tion of  our  bodies,  their  conformity  to  the  glorious  body  of 
Christ,  and  the  fruition  of  celestial  blessedness. 

lY.  The  blessings  which  flow  from  the  life  of  Christ,  fall 
partly  within  [spatia]  the  limits  of  this  life,  and  partly  within 
\tempora']  the  continued  duration  of  the  life  to  come. 

Y.  1.  Those  which  fall  within  the  limits  of  the  present  life 
are,  adoption  into  sons  of  God,  and  the  communication  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,    This  communication  comprises  within  itself 


116 


JAMES  AEMINTCS. 


three  particular  benefits  :  First.  Our  regeneration,  through 
the  illumination  of  the  mind  and  [renovationem]  the  renewal 
of  the  heart.  Secondly.  The  perpetual  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  excite  and  co-operate.  Thirdly.  The  testimony  of  the  same 
Spirit  with  our  hearts,  that  we  are  the  children  of  God,  on 
which  account  he  is  called  "  the  Spirit  of  adoption." 

YI.  2.  Those  which  fall  within  the  boundless  duration  of 
the  life  to  come,  are  our  preservation  from  future  wrath,  and 
the  bestowing  of  life  eternal ;  though  this  preservation  from 
wrath  may  seem  to  be  a  continued  act,  begun  and  carried 
on  in  this  world,  but  consummated  at  the  period  of  the  last 
judgment. 

YII.  Under  the  preservation  from  wrath,  also,  is  not  unsuit- 
ably comprehended  continued  justification  from  sins  through 
the  intercession  of  Christ,  who,  in  his  own  blood,  is  the  pro- 
pitiation for  our  sins,  and  our  advocate  before  God. 


DISPUTATION  XLYIII. 

ON  JUSTIFICATION. 

I.  The  spiritual  benefits  which  believei-s  enjoy  in  the  pres- 
ent life,  from  their  union  with  Christ  through  communion 
with  his  death  and  life,  may  be  properly  referred  to  that  of 
justification  and  sanctification,  as  in  those  two  is  comprehend- 
ed the  whole  promise  of  the  new  covenant,  in  which  God 
promises  that  he  will  pardon  sins,  and  will  write  his  laws  in 
the  hearts  of  believers,  who  have  entered  into  covenant  with 
him. 

n.  Justification  is  a  just  and  gracious  act  of  God  as  a 
judge,  by  which,  from  the  throne  of  his  grace  and  mercy,  he 
absolves  from  his  sins,  man,  a  sinner,  but  who  is  a  believer, 
on  account  of  Christ,  and  the  obedience  and  righteousness  of 
Christ,  and  considers  him  [justum]  righteous,  to  the  salvation 
of  the  justified  person,  and  to  the  glory  of  divine  righteous- 
nesss  and  grace. 


FEIVATE  DISPITTATIONS. 


IIT 


ni.  We  say  that  "  it  is  the  act  of  God  as  a  judge,"  who 
though  as  the  supreme  legislator  he  could  have  [dispensare  de] 
issued  regulations  concerning  his  law,  and  actually  did  issue 
them,  yet  has  not  administered  this  [dispensationem]  direction 
through  the  absolute  plenitude  of  infinite  power,  but  contain- 
ed himself  within  the  bounds  of  justice  which  he  demonstra- 
ted by  two  methods,  fikst,  because  God  would  not  justify, 
except  as  justification  was  preceded  by  reconciliation  and  sat- 
isfaction made  through  Christ  in  his  blood  ;  secondly,  because 
he  would  not  justify  any  except  those  who  acknowledged  their 
sins  and  believed  in  Christ. 

lY.  We  say  that  "  it  is  a  gracious  and  merciful  act ;  "  not 
with  respect  to  Christ,  as  if  the  Father,  through  grace  as  dis- 
tinguished from  strict  and  rigid  justice,  had  accepted  the  obe- 
dience of  Christ  for  righteousness,  but  with  7'espect  to  us,  both 
because  God,  through  his  gracious  mercy  towards  us,  has 
made  Christ  to  be  sin  for  us,  and  righteousness  to  us,  that  we 
might  be  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him,  and  because  he  has 
placed  communion  with  Christ  in  the  faith  of  the  gospel,  and 
has  set  forth  Christ  as  a  propitiation  through  faith. 

Y.  The  meritorious  cause  of  justification  is  Christ  through 
his  obedience  and  righteousness,  who  may,  therefore,  be  justly 
called  the  principal  or  outwardly  moving  cause.  In  his  obedi- 
ence and  righteousness,  Christ  is  also  the  material  cause  of 
our  justification,  so  far  as  God  bestows  Christ  on  us  for  right- 
eousness, and  imputes  his  righteousness  and  obedience  to 
us.  In  regard  to  this  two-fold  cause,  that  is,  the  meritorious 
and  the  material,  we  are  said  to  be  constituted  righteous 
through  the  obedience  of  Christ. 

YI.  The  object  of  justification  is  man,  a  sinner,  acknowl- 
edging himself,  with  sorrow,  to  be  such  an  one,  and  a  believer, 
that  is,  believing  in  God  who  justifies  the  ungodly,  and  in 
Christ  as  having  been  delivered  for  our  offences,  and  raised 
again  for  our  justification.  As  a  sinner,  man  needs  justifica- 
tion through  grace,  and,  as  a  believer,  he  obtains  justification 
through  grace. 

YII.  Faith  is  the  instrumental  cause,  or  act,  by  which  we 
apprehend  Christ  proposed  to  us  by  God  for  a  propitiation  and 


118 


JAMES  ARMmiUS. 


for  righteousness,  according  to  the  command  and  promise  of 
the  gospel,  in  which  it  is  said,  He  who  believes  shall  be 
justified  and  saved,  and  he  who  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned." 

YIII.  The  form  is  the  gracious  [cestimatio]  reckoning  of 
God,  by  which  he  imputes  to  us  the  righteousness  of  Christ, 
and  imputes  faith  to  us  for  righteousness  ;  that  is,  he  remits 
our  sins  to  us  ^vho  are  believers,  on  account  of  Christ  appre- 
hended by  faith,  and  [censet]  accounts  us  righteous  in  him. 
This  estimation  or  reckoning,  has,  joined  with  it,  adoption 
into  sons,  and  the  conferring  of  a  right  to  the  inheritance  of 
life  eternal. 

IX.  The  end^  for  the  sake  of  which  is  the  salvation  of  the 
justified  person  ;  for  that  act  [pei'a^gitur]  is  performed  for  the 
good  of  the  man  himself  who  is  justified.  The  end  which 
[existit]  flows  from  justification  without  any  advantage  to  God 
who  justifies,  is  the  glorious  demonstration  of  divine  justice 
and  grace. 

X.  The  most  excellent  effects  of  this  justification  are  peace 
with  God  and  tranquillity  of  conscience,  [gloriatio]  rejoicing 
under  afflictions  in  hope  of  the  glory  of  God  and  in  God  him- 
self, and  an  assured  expectation  of  life  eternal. 

XI.  The  external  seal  of  justification  is  baptism  ;  the  inter- 
nal seal  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  testifying  together  with  our  [corde] 
spirits  that  we  are  the  children  of  God,  and  crying  in  our 
hearts,  Abba^  Father  ! 

XII.  But  we  have  yet  to  consider  justification,  both  about 
the  beginning  of  conversion,  when  all  preceding  sins  are  for- 
given, and  through  the  whole  life,  because  God  has  promised 
remission  of  sins  to  believers,  those  who  have  entered  into 
covenant  with  him,  as  often  as  they  repent  and  flee  by  true 
faith  to  Christ  their  propitiator  and  expiator.  But  the  end 
and  completion  of  justification  will  be  [sul)]  at  the  close  of 
life,  when  God  will  grant  to  those  who  end  their  days  in  the 
faith  of  Christ,  to  find  his  mercy,  absolving  them  from  all  the 
sins  which  had  been  perpetrated  through  the  whole  of  their 
lives.  The  declaration  and  manifestation  of  justification  will 
be  in  the  future  general  judgment. 


PEIYATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


119 


Xin.  The  opposite  to  justification  is  condemnation,  and  this 
by  an  immediate  contrariety,  so  that  between  these  two  no 
medium  can  be  imagined. 

COEOLLAEIES. 

I.  That  faith  and  works  concur  together  to  justification,  is  a 
thing  impossible. 

II.  Faith  is  not  correctly  denominated  the  formal  cause  of 
justification  ;  and  when  it  receives  that  appellation  from  some 
divines  of  our  profession,  it  is  then  \pbudve'\  improperly  so 
called. 

III.  Christ  has  not  [promeriturn]  obtained  by  his  merits 
that  we  should  be  justified  by  the  worthiness  and  merit  of 
faith,  and  much  less  thi^t  we  should  be  justified  by  the  merit 
of  works  :  But  the  merit  of  Christ  is  opposed  to  justification 
by  works ;  and,  in  the  Scriptures,  faith  and  merit  are  placed 
in  opposition  to  each  other. 


DISPUTATIOlSr  XLIX. 

ON  THS  SANOTIFICATION  OF  MAN. 

r.  The  word  "  sanctifi cation"  denotes  an  act,  by  which  any 
thing  is  separated  from  common  use,  and  is  consecrated  to 
divine  use. 

II.  Commonuse^  about  the  sanctification  of  which  [to  divine 
purposes]  we  are  now^  treating,  is  either  according  to  nature 
itself,  by  which  man  lives  \animalem\  a  natural  life  ;  or  it  is 
according  to  the  corruption  of  sin,  by  which  he  lives  to  sin 
and  obeys  it  in  its  [concupiscentiis]  lusts  or  desires.  Divine 
use  is  w^hen  a  man  lives  according  to  godliness,  in  a  conformity 
to  the  holiness  and  righteousness  in  which  he  was  created. 

III.  Therefore,  this  sanctification,  with  respect  to  [termini 
a  quo]  the  boundary  from  which  it  proceeds,  is  either  from  the 


120 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


natural  use,  or  from  the  use  of  sin  ;  the  boundary  [ad  quern] 
to  which  it  tends,  is  the  supernatural  and  divine  use. 

lY.  But  when  we  treat  about  man,  as  a  sinner,  then  sancti- 
fication  is  thus  defined :  It  is  a  gracious  act  of  God,  by  which 
[repurg-at]  he  purifies  man  who  is  a  sinner,  and  yet  a  believer, 
from  the  darkness  of  ignorance,  from  indwelling  sin  and  from 
its  lusts  or  desires,  and  imbues  him  with  the  Spirit  of  knowl- 
edge, righteousness  and  holiness,  that,  being  separated  from 
the  life  of  the  world  and  made  conformable  to  God,  man  may 
live  the  life  of  God,  to  the  praise  of  the  righteousness  and  of 
the  glorious  grace  of  God,  and  to  his  own  salvation. 

Y.  Therefore,  this  sanctification  consists  in  these  two  things : 
In  [mortificatlone]  the  death  of  "  the  old  man,  who  is  corrupt 
according  to  the  deceitful  lusts,"  and  in  [vivijioatione]  the 
quickening  or  enlivening  of  "  the  new  man,  who,  after  God, 
is  created  in  righteousness  and  the  holiness  of  truth." 

YI.  The  author  of  sanctification  is  God,  the  Holy  Father 
himself,  in  his  Son  who  is  the  Holy  of  holies,  through  the 
Spirit  [sanctificationis]  of  holiness.  The  external  instrument 
is  the  word  of  God ;  the  internal  one  is  faith  yielded  to  the 
word  preached.  For  the  word  does  not  s&.nctify,  only  as  it  is 
preached,  unless  the  faith  be  added  by  which  the  hearts  of 
men  are  purified. 

YII.  the  object  of  sanctification  is  man,  a  sinner,  and  yet  a 
believer — asiiinei^  because,  being  contaminated  through  sin  and 
addicted  to  a  life  of  sin,  he  is  [incptus]  unfit  to  serve  the  liv- 
ing God — a  heliever,  because  he  is  united  to  Christ  through 
faith  in  him,  on  whom  our  holiness  is  founded ;  and  he  is 
planted  together  with  Christ  and  joined  to  him  in  a  conformity 
with  his  death  and  resurrection.  Hence,  he  dies  to  sin,  and  is 
excited  or  raised  up  to  a  new  life. 

YII.  The  subject  is,  properly,  the  soul  of  man.  And,  first, 
the  mind,  which  is  illuminated,  the  dark  clouds  of  ignorance 
being  driven  away.  Next,  [affectus]  the  inclination  or  the 
will,  by  which  it  is  delivered  from  the  dominion  of  indwelling 
sin,  and  [perfunditur]  is  filled  with  the  spirit  of  holiness. 
The  body  is  not  changed,  either  as  to  its  essence  or  its  inward 
qualities  ;  but  as  it  is  a  part  of  the  man,  who  is  consecrated  to 


PRr7ATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


121 


God,  and  is  an  instrument  united  to  the  soul,  having  been  re- 
moved by  the  sanctified  soul  which  inhabits  it  from  [usihus] 
the  purposes  of  sin,  it  is  admitted  to  and  emploj^ed  in  the  ser- 
vice of  God,  "  that  our  whole  spirit  and  soul  and  body  may 
be  preserved  blameless  unto  the  day  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ." 

IX.  The  form  lies  in  the  purification  from  sin,  and  in 
a  conformity  with  God  in  the  body  of  Christ  through  his  Spirit. 

X.  The  end  is,  that  a  believing  man,  being  consecrated 
to  God  as  a  priest  and  king,  should  serve  him  in  newness 
of  life,  to  the  glory  of  his  divine  name,  and  to  the  salva- 
tion of  man. 

XI.  As,  under  the  Old  Testament,  the  priests,  when  ap- 
proaching to  render  worship  to  God,  were  accustomed  to  be 
sprinkled  with  blood,  so,  likewise,  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ, 
which  is  the  blood  of  the  New  Testament,  serves  for  this  pur- 
pose— to  sprinkle  us,  who  are  constituted  by  him  as  priests, 
to  serve  the  living  God.  In  this  respect,  the  sprinkling  of 
the  blood  of  Christ,  which  principally  serves  for  the  expiation 
of  sins,  and  which  is  the  cause  of  justification,  belongs  also  to 
canctification  ;  for  [illic]  in  justification,  this  sprinkling  serves 
to  wash  away  sins  that  have  been  committed  ;  but  in  sanctifi- 
cation,  it  serves  to  sanctify  men  who  have  obtained  remission 
of  their  sins,  that  they  may  further  be  enabled  to  offer  worship 
and  sacrifices  to  God,  through  Christ. 

XIL  This  sanctification  is  not  completed  in  a  single  mo- 
ment ;  but  sin,  from  whose  dominion  we  have  been  delivered 
through  the  cross  and  the  death  of  Christ,  is  weakened  more 
and  more  by  daily  [detrimentd]  losses,  and  the  inner  man  is 
day  by  day  renewed  more  and  more,  while  we  carry  about 
with  us  in  our  bodies,  the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  outward 
man  [cort'umjpitur]  is  perishing. 

COKOLLARY. 

We  permit  this  question  to  be  made  the  subject  of  discus- 
sion :  Does  the  death  of  the  body  bring  the  perfection  and 
completion  of  sanctification — and  how  is  this  effect  produced} 

9  ,   '  :■■      •*  TOL  II. 


122 


DISPUTATION  L. 

ON  THE  CHURCH  OF  GOD  AOT)  OF  CHRIST:   OR  ON  THE  CHTJECH 
IN  GENERAL  AFTER  THE  FALL. 

I.  As,  througli  faith,  which  is  the  first  part  of  our  duty 
towards  God  and  Christ,  we  have  obtained  the  blessings  of 
justification  and  sanctification  from  our  union  and  communion 
with  Christ,  by  which  benefits  we  are,  from  children  of  wrath 
and  the  slaves  of  sin,  not  only  constituted  the  children  of  God 
and  the  servants  of  righteousness,  (on  which  account  it  is  fit 
that  we  should  render  obedience  and  worship  to  our  Parent 
and  our  Lord,)  and  as  we  have  likewise  obtained  power  and 
[JiduciaTri]  confidence  for  the  performance  of  such  obedience 
and  worship,  it  would  follow  that  we  should  now  treat  on  obe- 
dience and  worship  as  on  another  part  of  our  duty. 

n.  But  as  there  are  multitudes  of  those  who  have,  through 
these  benefits,  been  made  the  sons  and  the  servants  of  God, 
and  who  have  been  united,  among  themselves,  by  the  same  faith 
and  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  as  members  in  one  body,  which  is  call- 
ed the  church,  and  of  which  the  Scriptures  make  frequent 
mention,  it  appears  to  be  the  most  proper  course  to  treat, 
FIRST,  upon  this  chm^ch,  because,  as  she  derives  her  origin 
from  this  faith,  she  comprehends  within  her  embraces  all  those 
to  whom  the  performance  of  worship  to  God  and  Christ  is  to 
be  prescribed. 

III.  And  as  it  has  pleased  God  to  institute  certain  signs  bj 
which  may  be  sealed  or  testified,  both  the  communion  of  be- 
lievers with  Christ  and  among  themselves,  and  a  participation 
of  these  benefits,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  their  service  of  grat- 
itude towards  God  and  Christ,  we  shall  deem  it  proper,  next, 
to  treat  upon  these  signs  or  tokens,  before  we  proceed  to  the 
worship,  itself,  which  is  due  to  God  and  Christ.  First,  then, 
let  us  consider  the  church. 

lY.  This  word,  in  its  general  acceptation,  denotes  [coetum] 
a  company  or  congregation  of  men  who  are  called  out,  and  not 
only  the  act  and  the  command  ot  him  who  calls  them  out,  but 


PRIVATE  DIPUTATI0N8. 


123 


likewise  the  obedient  compliance  of  those  who  answer  the  call ; 
so  that  the  result  or  effect  of  that  act  is  included  in  the  word 
"church." 

Y.  But  it  is  thus  defined  :  A  company  of  persons  called  out 
from  a  state  [ani  nalis]  of  natural  life  and  of  sin,  by  God  and 
Christ,  through  the  Spirit  of  both,  to  a  supernatural  life  to  be 
spent  according  to  God  and  Christ  in  the  knowledge  and 
worship  of  both,  that  by  a  participation  with  both,  they  may 
be  eternally  blessed,  to  the  glory  of  God  through  Christ,  and 
of  Christ  in  God. 

YI.  The  efficient  cause  of  this  evocation,  or  calling  out,  is 
God  the  Father,  in  his  Son  J esus  Christ,  and  Christ  himself, 
through  the  Spirit,  both  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  as  he  is 
Mediator  and  the  Head  of  the  church,  sanctifying  and  regen- 
erating her  to  a  new  life.  The  impulsive  cause  is  the  gracious 
good  pleasure  of  God  the  Father,  in  Christ,  and  the  love  of 
Christ  towards  those  whom  he  has  acquired  for  himself  »by  his 
own  blood. 

YII.  The  executive  cause  of  this  gracious  good  pleasure  of  - 
God  in  Christ,  which  may  also,  in  this  respect,  according  to 
[dispensationem]  its  distribution,  be  called  "  the  administra- 
tive cause,"  is  the  Sp'rit  of  God  and  of  Christ  by  the  word  of  * 
both  ;  by  which  he  requires  outwardly  a  life  according  to  God 
and  Christ,  with  the  addition  of  the  promise  of  a  reward  and  the 
theatening  of  a  punishment ;  and  he  inwardly  illuminates  the 
mind  to  a  knowledge  of  this  life,  [ajjicit]  imparts  to  us  the 
feelings  of  love  and  desire  for  this  life,  and  bestows  on  the 
whole  man  strength  and  power  to  live  such  a  life. 

YIII.  The  matter  about  which  [it  is  occupied],  or  the  object 
of  the  vocation,  are  [animales]  natural  and  sinful  men,  who, 
indeed,  according  to  nature,  are  capable  of  receiving  instruc- 
tion from  the  Spirit  through  the  word,  but  who  are,  according 
to  the  life  of  the  present  world  and  the  state  of  sin,  darkened 
in  their  minds  and  alienated  from  the  life  of  God.  This  state 
requires  that  the  beginning  of  preaching  be  made  from  preach- 
ing the  law  as  it  [arguit]  reproves  sin  and  convinces  of  sin, 
and  thus  that  progress  be  made  to  the  preaching  of  the  gospel 
of  grace. 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


IX.  The  form  of  the  church  resides  in  the  mutual  relation 
of  God  and  Christ  who  calls,  and  of  the  church  who  obeys 
that  call,  according  to  which,  God  in  Christ,  bj  the  Spirit  of 
both,  [influit]  infuses  into  her  supernatural  life,  [sensum]  feel- 
ing or  sensation,  and  motion ;  and  she,  on  the  other  hand, 
being  quickened  and  under  the  influence  of  feeling  and 
motion,  begins  to  live  and  to  walk  according  to  godliness,  and 
in  expectation  of  the  blessings  promised, 

X.  The  end  of  this  evocation,  which  also  contains  the  chief 
good  of  the  church,  is  blessedness  perfected  and  consummated 
through  a  union  with  God  in  Christ.  From  this,  results  the 
glory  of  God,  who  unites  the  church  to  himself  and  beatifies 
her,  which  glory  is  declared  in  the  very  act  of  union  and 
beatification — also  the  glory  of  the  same  blessed  God,  when 
the  church  [canitur]  in  her  triumphant  songs  ascribes  to  him 
praise,  honor  and  glory  forever  and  ever. 

XI.  .From  the  act  of  this  evocation  and  from  the  form  of  the 
church  arising  out  of  it,  it  appears  that  a  distinction  must  be 
made  among  the  men  or  congregation,  as  they  are  men^  and 
as  they  are  called  out  and  obey  the  call ;  and  they  must  be 
BO  distinguished  that  the  company  to  whom  the  name  of  "  the 
church"  [aliquando]  at  any  time  belonged,  may  so  decline 
from  that  obedience  as  to  lose  the  name  of  "  the  church,"  God 
"  removing  their  candlestick  o  t  of  its  place,"  and  sending  a 
bill  of  divorce  to  his  disobedient  and  adulterous  wife.  Hence 
it  is  evident  that  the  glorying  of  the  papists  is  vain  on  this 
point — that  the  church  of  Rome  cannot  err  and  fall  away. 


DISPUTATION  LI. 

ON  THE  CHURCH  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT,  OK  UNDEK  THE 
PROMISE. 

I.  As  Jesus  Christ  is  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  for 
ever — as  he  is  [imus]  the  chief  or  deepest  corner-stone,  upon 
which  the  superstructure  of  the  church  is  raised,  being  buill 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


126 


up  both  by  prophets  and  apostles,  and  as  he  is  the  head  of  all 
those  who  will  be  partakers  of  salvation,  the  whole  church, 
therefore,  may,  in  this  sense,  be  called  "  Christian,"  though 
under  this  appellation,  peculiarly,  comes  the  church  as  she 
began  to  be  collected  together  after  the  actual  ascent  of  Christ 
into  heaven. 

II.  But  though  the  church  be  one  with  respect  to  its  founda- 
tion,  and  of  those  things  which  concern  the  substance  itsel 
yet,  because  it  has  pleased  God  [administrare]  to  govern  it 
according  to  different  methods,  in  reference  to  this  the  church 
may,  in  the  most  suitable  manner,  be  distinguished  into  the 
church  which  existed  in  the  times  of  the  Old  Testament  hefore 
Christy  and  into  that  which  flourished  in  the  times  of  the  New 
Testament  and  after  [exhibitum]  Christ  appeared  on  earths 

III.  "The  church,  prior  to  the  advent  of  Christ,  under  the 
dispensation  of  the  Old  Testament,"  is  that  which  was  called 
out,  (by  the  word  of  promise  concerning  the  seed  of  the  wo- 
man and  the  seed  of  Abraham,  and  concerning  the  Messiah 
who  was  subsequently  to  come,)  from  the  state  of  sin  and 
misery,  to  a  participation  of  the  righteousness  of  faith  and 
salvation,  and  to  the  faith  placed  in  that  promise — and  by  the 
word  of  the  law^  to  render  worship  to  God  in  confidence  of 
obtaining  mercy  in  this  blessed  Seed  and  the  promised 
Messiah,  [convenienter']  in  a  manner  suitable  to  the  infantile 
age  of  the  church  herself. 

lY.  The  word  of  promise  was  propounded,  in  the  beginning, 
in  a  very  general  manner  and  with  much  obscurity,  but  in 
succeeding  ages,  more  specially  and  with  greater  distinctness, 
and  still  more  so,  as  the  times  of  the  advent  of  the  Messiah  in 
the  flesh  drew  nearer. 

Y.  The  law  which  \serviit\  contributed  to  this  calling,  was 
both  the  moral  and  the  ceremonial  i  (for,  in  this  place,  the 
forensic  does  not  come  under  consideration  ;)  and  both  of 
them  as  delivered  [viva  voce']  orally,  and  as  comprised  and 
proposed  in  writing  by  Moses,  in  which  last  respect,  the  law 
is  principally  treated  upon  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and 
the  ISTew  Testament. 

YI.  The  moral  law  serves  this  office  in  a  two-fold  manner : 


126 


JAMES  ARMINroS. 


First,  by  demonstrating  the  necessity  of  the  gracious  promise, 
which  it  does  by  convincing  [men]  of  sins  against  the  law, 
and  of  the  weakness  [of  man]  to  perform  the  law.  To  this 
purpose  it  has  been  rigidly  and  strictly  propounded ;  and  it 
is  considered  as  so  proposed,  according  to  these  passages : 
"  The  man  that  doeth  them  shall  live  in  them,"  and  "  Cursed 
is  every  one  that  continueth  not  in  all  things  which  are  written 
in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do  them."  Secondly,  by  s^-jeww^ 
moderately,  or  with  clemency,  requiring  the  observance  of  it 
from  those  who  were  parties  to  the  covenant  of  promise. 

YII.  Though  the  observance  of  the  ceremonial  law  be  not, 
of  itself,  and  on  account  of  itself,  pleasing  to  God,  yet  the 
observance  of  it  was  prescribed  for  two  purposes  :  (1.)  That 
it  might  convince  of  the  guilt  of  sins  and  of  the  curse,  and 
might  thus  declare  the  necessity  of  the  gracious  promise.  (2.) 
And  that  [cont/ne:  et]  it  might  sustain  believers  by  the  hope  of 
the  promise,  which  hope  was  confirmed  by  the  typical  presignifi- 
cation  of  future  things.  In  the  former  of  these  two  respects, 
the  ceremonial  law  was  [signaculum]  the  seal  of  sins  ;  but  in 
the  latter,  it  was  the  seal  of  grace  and  remission. 

VIII.  The  church  of  those  times  must,  therefore,  be  con- 
sidered, both  as  it  is  called  the  heir,  and  as  called  the  infant, 
either  according  to  its  substance,  or  according  to  [disjposir 
tionem]  the  dispensation  and  economy  suitable  to  those 
times.  According  to  the  former  of  these  respects,  the 
church  was  under  the  prom'se  or  the  covenant  of  prom- 
ise ;  and  according  to  the  latter  respect,  she  was  under 
the  law  and  under  the  Old  Testament,  in  regard  to  which, 
that  people  is  called  servile,  or  in  bondage,  and  the  infant 
heir  "differing  in  nothing  from  a  servant,"  as,  in  regard  to  the 
promise,  the  same  people  are  denominated  free,  horii  of  a  free 
woman,  and  according  to  Isaac  "  counted  for  the  seed"  to 
whom  the  promise  was  made. 

IX.  According  to  the  promise,  the  church  was  a  willing 
people — according  to  the  Old  Testament,  a  carnal  people ; 
according  to  the  former  relation,  the  heir  of  spiritual  and 
heavenly  blessings ;  according  to  the  latter,  the  heir  of  spiritual 
and  earthly  blessings,  especially  of  the  land  of  Canaan  and  of 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


127 


its  benefits.  According  to  the  former  relation,  the  church 
was  endowed  with  the  Spirit  of  adoption ;  according  to  the 
latter,  she  had  this  Spirit  intermixed  with  that  of  bondage 
[durante]  as  long  as  the  promise  continued. 

X.  The  open  consideration  of  these  relations,  and  a  suitable 
comparison  and  opposition  between  the  covenant  of  promise, 
and  the  law  or  the  Old  Testament,  contributes  much  to  the 
[correct]  interpretation  of  several  passages  of  Scripture,  which, 
otherwise,  can  scarcely  be  at  all  explained,  or  at  least  with 
great  difficulty. 

COROLLABIES. 

I.  Because  the  Old  Testament  [dehuit]  was  forced  to  be 
abrogated,  therefore  it  was  to  be  confirmed,  not  by  the  blood 
of  a  testator  or  mediator,  but  of  brute  animals. 

II.  "  The  Old  Testament"  is  never  used  in  the  Scriptures 
for  the  covenant  of  grace. 

III.  The  confounding  of  the  promise  and  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  productive  of  much  obscurity  in  Christian  theology, 
and  is  the  cause  of  more  than  a  single  error. 


DISPUTATION  LII. 

ON  THE  CHUKOH  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT,  OR  UNDER  THE 

GOSPEL.  » 

I.  The  Church  of  the  ]N"ew  Testament  is  that  which,  from 
the  time  when  that  Testament  was  confirmed  by  the  blood  of 
Christ  the  mediatoi-  of  the  New  Testament,  or  from  the  period 
of  his  ascension  into  heaven,  began  to  be  called  out  from  a 
state  of  sin  which  was  plainly  manifested  by  the  word  of  the 
gospel,  and  by  the  Spirit  that  was  suited  to  the  heirs  who  had 
attained  to  the  age  of  adults — to  a  participation  of  the  right- 
eousness of  faith  and  of  salvation,  through  faith  placed  in  the 
gospel,  and  to  render  worship  to  God  and  Christ  in  the  unity 
of  the  same  Spirit ;  and  this  church  will  continue  to  be  called 


128 


JAMES  AEMINIIJ8. 


out  in  the  same  manner  to  the  end  of  the  world,  to  the  praise 
of  the  glory  of  the  gr^ce  of  God  and  of  Christ. 

II.  The  efficient  cause  is  the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  who  has  now  most  plainly  manifested  himself 
to  be  Jehovah  and  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and 
it  is  Christ  himself,  elevated  to  the  right  hand  of  the  Father, 
invested  with  full  power  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  and  endowed 
with  the  word  of  the  gospel  and  with  the  Spirit  beyond  meas- 
ure. The  antecedent  or  inly  moving  cause  is  the  grace  and 
mercy  of  God  the  Father  and  of  Christ,  and  even  the  justice 
of  God,  to  which,  through  the  good  pleasure  of  the  Father, 
the  fullest  satisfaction  has  now  been  made  in  Jesus  Christ,  and 
which  is  clearly  manifested  in  the  gospel. 

in.  The  Spirit  of  Christ  is  the  administering  cause,  accord- 
ing to  the  economy,  as  he  is  [vicarius]  the  substitute  of  Christ 
and  receives  of  that  which  is  Christ's,  to  glorify  Christ  by  this 
calling  forth  in  his  church,  with  only  a  full  power  to  adminis- 
ter all  things  [prout  vult]  according  to  his  own  pleasure. 
The  Spirit  uses  the  word  of  the  gospel  placed  in  the  mouth  of 
his  servants,  which  immediately  executes  this  vocation,  and 
the  word  of  the  law^  whether  written  or  implanted  in  the 
mind ;  the  gospel  serves  both  antecedently  that  a  place  may 
be  made  for  this  vocation,  and  consequently  when  it  has  been 
received  by  faith. 

lY.  The  object  of  this  evocation  is,  not  only  Jews,  but  also 
gentiles,  the  middle  wall  of  partition  which  formerly  separa- 
.  ted  the  gentiles  from  the  Jews  being  taken  away  by  the  flesh 
and  blood  of  Christ ;  that  is,  the  object  is  all  men  generally 
and  promiscuously  without  any  difference,  but  it  is  all  men 
actually  sinners,  whether  they  be  those  who  acknowledge 
themselves  as  such  and  to  whom  the  preaching  of  the  gospel 
is  \sta'im\  constantly  exhibited,  or  those  who  are  yet  to  be 
brought  to  the  acknowledgment  of  their  sins. 

Y.  Because  this  church  is  of  adult  age,  and  because  she  no 
longer  requires  a  tutor  and  governor,  she  is  free  from  the  eco- 
nomical \servitute\  bondage  of  the  law,  and  is  governed  by 
the  spirit  of  full  liberty,  which  is,  by  no  means,  intermixed 
with  the  spirit  of  bondage ;  and,  therefore,  she  is  free  from  the 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


129 


use  of  the  ceremonial  law,  so  far  as  it  served  [dbsigiiandis]  for 
testifying  of  sins,  and  as  it  was  "  the  hand-writing  which  was 
against  us." 

YI.  This  church,  also,  with  unveiled  or  open  face,  beholds 
the  glorj  of  the  Lord  as  in  a  glass,  and  has  the  very  express 
image  of  heavenly  things,  and  Christ,  the  image  of  the  invisi- 
ble God,  the  express  image  of  the  Father's  person,  and  the 
brightness  of  his  glory,  and  the  very  body  of  things  to  come  ^ 
which  is  of  Christ.  She,  therefore,  does  not  nee  1  the  law, 
which  has  the  shadow  of  good  things  to  come  ;  on  which  ac- 
count, she  is  free  from  the  same  ceremonial  law,  by  which  it 
typically  j^refigured  Christ  and  good  things  to  come. 

YII.  The  church  of  the  ISTew  Testament  [sensit]  has  not 
experienced,  does  not  now  experience,  and  will  not,  to  the  end 
of  the  world,  experience,  in  the  whole  of  its  course,  any  change 
whatever  with  regard  to  the  word  itself  or  the  spirit ;  for,  in 
these  last  times,  God  has  spoken  to  us  in  his  Son,  and  by  those 
who  have  heard  him. 

YIII.  This  same  church  is  called  "  catholic,"  in  a  peculiar 
and  distinct  sense  in  opposition  to  the  clmrch  which  was  un- 
der the  Old  Testament,  so  far  as  she  has  been  diffused  through 
the  whole  world,  and  has  embraced  within  her  boundary  all 
nations,  tribes,  people  and  tongues.  This  universality  is  not 
hindered  by  the  rejection  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Jews,  as 
they  will  also  be  added  to  the  church,  some  time  hence,  in  a 
great  multitude,  and  like  an  army  formed  into  columns. 

IX.  We  may  denominate,  not  unaptly  or  inappropriately,  ' 
the  state  of  the  church,  as  she  existed  from  the  time  of  John 
until  the  assent  of  Christ  into  heaven,  [inconsistentem']  "a 
temporary  or  intermediate  one"  between  the  state  of  the  prom- 
ise and  of  the  gospel,  or  that  of  the  Old  Testament  and  of  the 
J^ew. 

X.  On  which  account,  we  place  the  ministry  of  John  be- 
tween the  ministry  of  the  prophets  and  that  of  the  apostles, 
and  plainly,  and  in  every  respect,  conformable  to  neither  of 
them.  Hence,  also,  John  is  called  "  a  greater  prophet,"  and 
is  said  to  be  "  less  than  the  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 


130 


JAMES  ARMmiUS. 


COROLLARY. 

The  baptism  of  John  was  so  far  the  same  with  that  of 
Christ,  that  there  was  afterwards  no  need  for  it  to  be  re- 
stored. 


DISPUTATIO]^  LIII. 

ON  THE  HEAD  AND  THE  MARKS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

I.  Though  the  head  and  the  body  be  of  one  nature,  and 
thongh,  according  to  nature,  they  properly  constitute  one  sub- 
sistence, yet  he  who,  according  to  nature,  is  the  head  of  the 
church,  cannot  have  communion  of  nature  with  her,  for  she  is 
his  creature. 

II.  But  it  has  been  the  good  pleasure  of  God,  who  is  both 
the  bead  of  the  church  accord  iug  to  nature,  and  her  creator, 
to  bestow  on  his  church  his  Son  jJesus  Christ,  made  man,  as 
her  head,  by  whom,  likewise,  it  has  been  his  will  to  create  his 
church — that  is,  a  new  creature,  that  the  union  between  the 
church  and  her  head  might  be  closer,  and  the  communication 
more  free  and  confiding. 

III.  But  a  three-fold  relation  exists  between  the  church  and 
her  head  :  (1.)  That  the  head  contains  in  himself,  in  a  man- 
ner the  most  perfect,  all  things  which  are  necessary  and  suffi- 
cient for  salvation.  (2.)  That  he  is  fitly  united  to  the  church, 
his  body,  by  "the  joints  and  bands"  of  the  Spirit  and  of  faith. 
(3.)  That  the  head  can  [wjluere]  infuse  the  virtue  of  his  own 
perfection  into  her,  and  she  can  receive  it  from  him  according 
to  the  order  of  preordination  and  subordination  fitly  corres- 
ponding with  it  according  to  the  difference  of  both. 

lY.  But  these  three  things  belong  to  Christ  alone  ;  nay,  not 
one  of  the  three  agrees  with  any  person  or  thing  except  with 
Christ.  Wherefore,  he,  only,  is  the  head  of  the  church,  to 
whom  she  immediately  coheres  according  to  her  internal  and 
real  essence. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


131 


Y.  But  no  one  can,  according  to  this  relation,  be  vicar  or 
substitute  to  him  ;  neither  the  apostle  Peter,  nor  any  Eoman 
pontiff ;  nay,  Christ  can  have  no  one  among  men  as  his  vicar, 
according  to  the  external  administration  of  the  church  ;  and, 
what  is  still  more,  he  cannot  have  a  universal  minister,  which 
term  is  less  than  that  of  vicar. 

YI.  Yet  we  do  not  deny  that  those  persons  who  are  consti- 
tuted by  this  head  as  his  ministers,  perform  such  functions 
as  belong  to  the  head ;  because  it  has  been  his  pleasure  to 
gather  his  church  to  himself,  and  to  govern  it  by  human 
means. 

YII.  But,  according  to  her  internal  essence,  this  church  is 
known  to  no  one  except  to  her  head.  She  is  likewise  made 
known  to  others  by  signs  and  indications  which  have  their 
origin  from  her  true  internal  essence  itself,  if  they  be  real,  and 
not  counterfeit  and  deceptive  in  their  appearance. 

YIII.  These  signs  are,  the  profession  of  the  true  faith,  and 
the  institution  or  conducting  of  the  life  according  to  [prcB- 
scripfum']  the  direction  and  [instinctiiin]  the  instigation  of  the 
Spirit — a  matter  that  belongs  to  external  acts,  about  which, 
alone,  a  judgment  can  be  formed  by  mankind. 

IX.  We  say  that  these  are  the  marks  of  a  church  which 
outwardly  \hene  hahentis]  conducts  herself  with  propriety. 
But  it  may  come  to  pass,  that  a  mere  profession  of  faith  may 
obtain  in  this  church  through  the  public  preaching  and  hear- 
ing of  the  word,  through  the  administration  and  use  of  the  sac- 
raments, and  through  prayers  and  thanksgivings ;  and  yet  in 
her  whole  life  she  may  degenerate  from  the  profession ;  and, 
lastly,  she  may  in  her  deeds  deny  Christ,  whom  she  professes 
to  know  in  word,  in  which  case,  she  does  not  cease  to  be  a 
church  as  long  as  it  is  the  pleasure  of  God  and  Christ  to  bear 
with  her  ill  manners,  and  not  to  send  her  a  bill  of  divorce- 
ment. 

X.  But  it  has  happened  that  in  her  profession  itself,  she 
begins  to  intermix  falsehoods  with  truth,  and  to  worship,  at 
the  same  time,  Jehovah  and  Baal.  Then,  indeed,  her  condi- 
tion is  very  bad,  and  "  nigh  to  destruction,"  and  all  those  who 
adhere  to  her  are  commanded  to  desert  her,  so  far,  at  least,  as 


132 


JAMES  ABMINITJS. 


not  to  become  partakers  of  her  abominations,  and  to  contam- 
inate themselves  with  the  polhitions  of  her  idolatry  ;  nay, 
they  are  commanded  to  accuse  their  mother  of  being  a  harlot, 
and  of  having  violated  the  marriage  compact  with  her  hus- 
band. 

XI.  In  such  a  defection  as  this,  those  who  desert  her  are 
not  the  cause  of  the  dissension,  but  she  who  is  justly  deserted, 
because  she  first  declined  from  God  and  Christ,  to  whom  all 
believers,  and  each  of  them  in  particular,  must  adhere  by  [in- 
dividuo]  an  inseparable  connection. 

XII.  The  Roman  pontiff  is  not  the  head  of  the  church ; 
and  because  he  boasts  himself  of  being  that  head,  the  name 
of  "  Antichrist "  on  this  account  most  deservedly  belongs 
to  him. 

XIII.  The  marks  of  the  church  of  which  the  papists  boast 
— antiquity,  universality,  duration,  amplitude,  the  uninter- 
rupted succession  of  teachers,  and  agreement  in  doctrine — 
have  been  invented  beyond  those  which  we  have  laid  down, 
because  they  are  accommodated  to  the  present  state  of  the 
church  of  Rome. 


DISPUTATIOIVT  LIY. 

ON  THE  CATHOLIC  CHURCH,  HER  PARTS  AND  RELATIONS. 

I.  The  catholic  church  is  the  company  of  all  believers, 
called  out  from  every  language,  tribe,  people,  nation  and 
calling,  who  have  been,  are  now,  and  will  be,  called  by 
the  saving  vocation  of  God  from  a  state  of  corruption  to  the 
dignity  of  the  children  of  God,  through  the  word  [gratuiti] 
of  the  covenant  of  grace,  and  ingrafted  into  Christ,  as  living 
members  to  their  head  through  true  faith,  to  the  praise  of  the 
glory  of  the  grace  of  God.  From  this,  it  appears  that  the 
catholic  church  differs  from  particular  churches  in  nothing 
which  appertains  to  the  substance  of  a  church,  but  solely  in 
her  amplitude. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


133 


II.  But  as  she  is  called  "  the  catholic  church"  in  reference 
to  her  matter^  which  embraces  all  those  who  have  ever  been, 
are  now,  and  will  yet  be,  made  partakers  of  this  vocation, 
and  received  into  the  family  of  God,  so,  likewise,  is  she  de- 
nominated the  one  and  holy  church,"  from  her/brm,  which 
consists  in  the  mutual  relation  of  the  church,  who  by  faith, 
embraces  Christ  as  her  head  and  spouse,  and  of  Christ,  who 
so  closely  unites  the  church  to  himself,  as  his  body  and  spouse, 
by  his  Spirit,  that  the  church  lives  by  the  life  of  Christ  him- 
eelf,  and  is  made  a  partaker  of  him  and  of  all  his  benefits. 

III.  The  Catholic  Church  is  "  one,"  because,  under  one  God 
and  Father,  who  is  above  all  persons,  and  through  all  things, 
and  in  all  of  us,  she  has  been  united  as  one  body  to  one  head, 
Christ  the  Lord,  through  one  Spirit,  and  through  one  faith 
placed  in  the  same  word,  through  a  similar  hope  of  the  same 
inheritance,  and  through  mutual  charity,  she  has  been  "  fitly 
framed  and  built  for  a  holy  temple,  and  a  habitation  of  God 
through  the  Spirit."  Wherefore,  the  whole  of  this  unity  is 
spiritual,  though  those  who  have  been  thus  united  together 
consist  partly  of  body,  and  partly  of  spirit. 

lY.  She  is  "  holy  ;"  because,  \henefici6\  by  the  blessing  of 
the  Holy  of  holies,  she  has  been  separated  from  the  unclean 
world,  washed  from  her  sins  by  his  blood,  \decoTat(i\  beauti- 
fied with  the  presence  and  gracious  indwelling  of  God,  and 
adorned  with  true  holiness  by  the  sanctification  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

Y.  But  though  this  church  is  one,  yet  she  is  distinguished 
according  to  the  acts  of  God  towards  her,  so  far  as  \^jpeTcepit\ 
she  has  become  the  recipient  of  either  of  all  of  those  acts,  or 
of  some  of  them.  The  church  that  has  received  only  the  act 
of  her  creation  and  preservation,  is  said  to  be  in  the  way^  and 
is  called  "  the  church  militant,"  as  being  she  that  must  yet 
contend  with  sin,  the  flesh,  the  world,  and  Satan.  The  church 
that,  in  addition  to  this,  is  made  partaker  of  the  consumma- 
tion, is  said  to  be  in  her  native  land,  and  is  called  "  the  church 
triumphant;"  for,  after  having  conquered  all  her  enemies, 
she  rests  from  her  labors,  and  reigns  with  Christ  in  heaven. 
To  that  part  which  is  still  militant  on  earth,  the  title  of  "cath- 


134 


JAMES  AEMmrus. 


olic"  is  likewise  ascribed,  so  far  as  she  embraces  within  her 
boundaries  all  particular  militant  churches. 

YI.  But  the  catholic  church  is  distributed,  according  to  her 
parts,  into  many  particular  churches,  since  she  consists  of  many- 
congregations  far  distant  from  each  other,  with  respect  to 
place,  and  quite  distinct.  But  as  these  particular  churches 
have  severally  the  name  of  "a  church,"  so  they  have  like- 
wise the  thing  signified  by  the  name  and  the  entire  definition 
like  similar  parts  which  participate  in  the  name  and  definition 
of  the  whole  ;  and  the  catholic  church  differs  from  each  par- 
ticular one  solely  in  her  universality,  and  in  no  other  thing 
whatever  which  belongs  to  the  essence  of  a  church.  Hence, 
is  easily  [intelligitur]  learned  in  what  manner  it  may  be  un- 
derstood that,  as  single,  particular  churches  may  err,  yet  the 
church  universal  cannot  err ;  that  is,  in  this  sense,  that  there 
never  will  be  a  future  time  in  which  some  believers  will  not 
exist  who  do  not  err  in  the  foundation  of  religion.  But  from 
this  interpretation,  it  is  apparent  that  it  cannot  be  concluded 
from  the  circumstance  of  the  catlioliG  church  being  said  to  he 
in  this  sense^free  from  error ^  that  any  congregation,  however 
numerous  soever  it  may  be,  is  exempt  from  error,  unless  there 
be  in  it  one  person,  or  more,  who  are  so  guided  into  all  truth 
as  to  be  incapable  of  erring. 

YII.  Hence,  since  the  evocation  of  the  church  is  made  in- 
wardly by  the  Spirit,  and  outwardly  by  the  word  preached, 
and  since  they  who  are  called,  answer  inwardly  by  faith,  and 
outwardly  by  the  profession  of  faith,  as  they  who  are  called  have 
the  inward  and  the  outward  man,  therefore,  the  church,  in  ref- 
erence to  these  called  persons,  is  distinguished  into  the  visible 
and  the  invisible  church,  from  the  subjoined  external  accident 
— invisible^  as  she  "  believes  with  the  heart  unto  righteous- 
ness," and  visible^  as  "confession  is  made  with  her  mouth  imto 
salvation."  And  this  visibility  or  invisibility  belongs  neither 
more  nor  less  to  the  whole  catholic  chm-ch,  than  to  each 
church  in  particular. 

Yin.  Then,  since  the  church  is  collected  out  of  this  world, 
"  which  lieth  in  the  wicked  one,"  and  often  by  ministers  who, 
beside  the  word  of  God,  preach  another  word,  and  since  this 


PKIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


135 


churcli  consists  of  men  liable  to  be  deceived  and  to  fall,  nay, 
of  men  who  liave  been  deceived  and  are  fallen,  therefore,  the 
church  is  distinguished  with  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  faith, 
into  an  orthodox  and  heretical  church — with  respect  to  divine 
worship,  into  an  idolatrous  church,  and  into  one  that  is  a  right 
worshiper  of  God  and  Christy  and  with  respect  to  the  morals 
prescribed  in  the  second  table  of  the  law,  into  ^jpurer  church 
or  a  more  imjpiire  one.  In  all  these,  are  also  to  be  observed 
the  degrees  according  to  which  one  church  is  more  heretical ,  idol- 
atrous and  impure  than  another  ;  about  all  these  things  a  cor- 
rect judgment  must  be  formed  according  to  the  Scriptures. 
Thus,  likewise,  the  word  "  catholic"  is  used  concerning  those 
churches  that  neither  labor  under  any  destructive  heresy,  nor 
are  idolatrous. 


DISPUTATION  LY. 

ON  THE  POWER  OF  THE  CHURCH  IN  DELIVERING  DOCTRINES. 

I.  The  power  of  the  church  may  be  variously  considered, 
according  to  various  objects ;  for  it  is  occupied  either  about 
the  delivery  of  doctrines,  the  enactment  of  laws,  the  conve- 
ning of  assemblies,  the  appointment  of  ministers,  or,  lastly, 
about  jurisdiction. 

II.  In  the  institution  of  doctrines,  or  in  the  first  delivery  of 
them,  the  power  of  the  church  is  a  mere  nullity,  whether  she 
be  considered  generally,  or  according  to  her  parts  ;  for  she  is 
the  spouse  of  Christ,  and,  therefore,  is  bound  to  hear  the 
voice  of  her  husband.  She  cannot  prescribe  to  herself  the 
rule  of  willing,  believing,  doing  and  hoping. 

III.  But  the  whole  of  her  power,  concerning  doctrines,  lies 
in  the  dispensation  and  administration  of  those  which  have 
been  delivered  by  God  and  Christ — ^necessarily  previous  to 
which  is  the  humble  and  pious  accej)tance  of  the  divine  doc- 
trines, the  consequence  of  which  is,  that  she  justly  preserves 
the  name  that  has  once  been  received. 


136 


JAMES  ARMINTUS. 


lY.  As  the  acceptance  and  [custodia]  the  preservation  of 
doctrines  may  be  considered  either  according  to  the  words,  or 
according  to  the  right  sense,  so,  likewise  [traditio]  the  deliv- 
ery of  the  doctrines  received  and  preserved  mnst  be  distin- 
guished either  with  respect  to  the  words,  or  with  respect  to 
their  correct  meaning. 

Y.  The  delivery  or  tradition  of  doctrines  according  to  tke 
words^  is  when  the  church  declares  or  publishes  the  very 
words  which  she  has  received,  (after  they  have  been  delivered 
to  her  by  God,  either  in  writing  or  orally,)  without  any  addi- 
tion, diminution,  change  or  transposition,  whether  from  [at- 
chivis]  the  repositories  in  which  she  has  concealed  the  divine 
writings,  or  from  her  own  memory,  in  which  she  had  care- 
fully and  faithfully  preserved  those  things  which  had  been 
orally  delivered.  At  the  same  time,  she  solemnly  testifies 
that  those  very  things  which  she  has  received  from  above  are 
[when  transmitted  through  her]  pure  and  [sincerd]  unadulte- 
rated, (and  is  prepared  even  by  death  itself  to  confirm  this 
her  testimony,)  as  far  as  [yarietas]  the  variations  of  copies  in 
the  original  languages  permit  a  translator  into  other  langua- 
ges [thus  to  testify]  ;  yet  they  do  not  concern  the  foun- 
dation so  much  as  to  be  able  to  produce  doubts  concerning 
it  on  account  of  these  variations. 

YI.  The  delivery  or  tradition  according  to  the  meaning^  is 
the  more  ample  explanation  and  application  of  the  doctrines 
propounded  and  comprehended  in  the  divine  words,  in  which 
explanation,  the  church  ought  to  contain  herself  within  the 
terms  of  the  very  word  which  has  been  delivered,  publishing 
no  particular  interpretation  of  a  doctrine  or  of  a  passage, 
which  does  not  rest  on  the  entire  foundation,  and  which 
cannot  be  fully  proved  from  other  passages.  This  she  will 
most  sedulously  avoid  if  she  adhere  as  much  as  possible  \vo- 
cihus]  to  the  expressions  of  the  word  delivered,  and  if  she 
abstain,  as  far  as  she  is  capable,  from  the  use  of  foreign 
words  or  phrases. 

YII.  To  this  power,  is  annexed  the  right  of  examining  and 
forming  a  judgment  upon  doctrines,  as  to  the  kind  of  spirit 
by  which  they  have  been  proposed ;  in  this,  also,  she  will  em- 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATOINS. 


137 


ploy  the  rule  of  the  word  which  [certo  constat]  bears  assured 
evidences  that  it  is  divine,  and  has  been  received  as  such ;  and 
indeed,  they  will  employ  the  rule  of  this  word  alone,  if  she 
be  desirous  to  institute  a  proper  examination,  and  to  form  a 
correct  judgment.  But  if  she  employ  any  human  writings 
whatsoever,  for  a  rule  or  guide,  the  morning  light  will  not  shine 
on  her,  and,  therefore,  she  will  grope  about  in  darkness. 

YIII.  But  the  church  ought  to  be  guarded  against  three 
things  :  (1.)  To  hide  from  no  one  the  words  which  have  been 
divinely  delivered  to  her,  or  to  interdict  any  man  from  read- 
ing them  or  meditating  upon  them.  (2.)  When,  for  certain 
reasons,  she  declares  divine  doctrines  with  her  own  words, 
not  to  compel  any  one  to  receive  or  to  approve  them,  except 
on  this  condition,  so  far  as  they  are  constantaneous  with  the 
meaning  comprehended  in  the  divine  words.  (3.)  And  not 
to  prohibit  any  man  who  is  desirous  of  examining,  in  a  legitimate 
manner,  the  doctrines  proposed  in  the  words  of  the  church. 
Whichsoever  of  these  things  she  does,  she  cannot,  in  that 
case,  evade  the  criminal  charge  of  having  arrogated  a  power 
to  herself,  and  of  abusing  it  beyond  all  law,  right  and  equity. 

COROLLARY. 

It  is  one  of  the  fabulous  stories  of  the  papists  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  assists  the  church  in  such  a  manner,  in  forming  her 
judgment  on  the  authentic  Scriptures,  and  in  the  right  inter- 
pretation of  the  divine  meanings,  that  she  cannot  err. 


DISPUTATION  LYI. 

ON  THE  POWER  OF  THE  CHURCH  IN  ENACTING  LAWS. 

L  The  laws  which  may  be  prescribed  to  the  church,  or 
which  may  be  considered  as  having  been  prescribed,  are  of 
two  kinds,  distinguished  from  each  other  by  a  remarkable  dif- 
ference and  by  a  notable  doctrine — according  to  the  matter, 

10  VOL,  II; 


138 


JAMES  AEMrNIUS. 


that  is,  the  acts  which  are  prescribed — according  to  the  end 
for  the  sake  of  which  they  are  prescribed,  and,  lastly,  accord- 
ing to  the  force  and  necessity  of  obligation. 

II.  (1.)  For  some  laws  concern  the  very  essence  of  order- 
ing the  life  according  to  godliness  and  Christianity,  and  the  ne- 
cessary acts  of  faith,  hope  and  charity ;  and  these  may  be 
called  the  necessary  and  primary  or  principal  laws,  and  are  as 
the  fundamental  laws  of  the  kingdom  of  God  itself.  (2.) 
But  others  of  them  have  respect  to  certain  secondary  and  sub- 
stituted acts,  and  the  circumstances  of  the  principal  acts,  all 
of  which  conduce  to  the  more  commodious  and  easy  observ- 
ance of  those  first  acts.  On  this  account  they  deserve  to  be 
called  positive  and  [inservientis]  attendant  laws. 

III.  1.  The  church  neither  has  a  right,  nor  is  she  bound  by 
any  necessity,  to  enact  necessary  laws,  and  those  which  essen- 
tially concern  the  acts  of  faith  itself,  of  hope  and  of  charity. 
For  this  [prerogative]  belongs  most  properly  to  God  and  Christ; 
and  it  has  been  so  [prolixe]  fully  exercised  by  Christ,  that  no- 
thing can  essentially  belong  to  the  acts  of  faith,  hope  and 
charity,  which  has  not  been  prescribed  by  him  in  a  manner 
the  most  copious. 

lY.  2.  The  entire  power,  therefore,  of  the  church  is 
placed  in  enacting  laws  of  the  second  kind ;  about  the  ma- 
king and  observing  of  which  we  must  now  make  some  ob- 
servations. 

Y.  In  prescribing  laws  of  this  kind,  the  church  ought  to 
turn  her  eyes,  and  to  keep  them  fixed,  on  the  following  par- 
ticulars :  First.  That  the  acts  which  she  will  command  or 
forbid  be  [medii]  of  a  middle  or  an  indifferent  kind,  and  in 
their  own  nature  neither  good  nor  evil ;  and  yet  that  they  may 
be  useful,  for  the  commodious  observance  of  the  acts  [divine- 
ly] prescribed,  according  to  the  circumstance  of  persons,  times 
and  places.  [§II.] 

YI.  Secondly.  That  laws  of  this  description  be  not  adverse 
to  the  word  of  God,  but  that  they  rather  be  conformable  to  it, 
whether  they  be  deduced  from  those  things  which  are,  in  a 
general  manner,  prescribed  in  the  word  of  God,  according  to 
the  circumstances  already  enumerated,  or  whether  they  be  con- 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


139 


sidered  as  suitable  means  for  executing  those  things  which 
have  been  prescribed  in  the  word  of  God. 

yil.  Thikdly.  That  these  laws  be  principally  referred  to 
the  good  order  and  the  decorous  administration  of  the  external 
polity  of  the  church.  For  God  is  not  the  author  of  confusion ; 
but  he  is  both  the  author  and  the  lover  of  order ;  and  regard 
is  in  every  place  to  be  paid  to  decorum,  but  chiefly  in  the 
church,  which  is  "  the  house  of  God,"  and  in  which  [minime 
deeet]  it  is  exceedingly  unbecoming  to  have  any  thing,  or  to 
do  any  thing,  that  is  either  indecorous  or  out  of  order. 

YIII.  FoDRTHLY.  That  she  do  not  assume  to  herself  the 
authority  of  binding,  by  her  laws,  the  consciences  of  men  to 
acts  prescribed  by  herself ;  for  she  will  thus  invade  the  right 
of  Christ,  in  prescribing  things  necessary,  and  will  infringe 
christian  liberty,  which  ought  to  be  free  from  snares  of  this 
description. 

IX.  Fifthly.  That,  by  any  deed  of  her  own,  by  a  simple 
promise  or  by  an  oath,  either  orally  or  by  the  subscription  of 
the  hand,  she  do  not  take  away  from  herself  the  power  of  abro- 
gating, enlarging,  diminishing  or  of  changing  the  laws  them- 
selves. It  would  not  be  a  useless  labor  if  the  church  were  to 
enter  her  protest,  at  the  end  of  the  laws,  about  the  perpetual 
duration  of  this  her  power,  in  a  subjoined  clause,  such  as  the 
civil  magistrate  is  accustomed  to  employ  in  political  positive 
laws. 

X.  But  with  regard  to  the  observance  of  these  laws ;  as 
they  are  already  enacted,  all  and  every  one  of  those  who  are 
in  the  church  are  bound  by  them  so  far,  that  it  is  not  lawful 
to  transgress  them  through  contempt^  and  to  the  scandal  of 
others ;  and  the  church  herself  will  not  estimate  the  observ- 
ance of  them  at  so  low  a  value  as  to  permit  them  to  be  viola- 
ted through  contempt  and  to  the  scandal  of  others  ;  but  she 
will  mark,  admonish,  reprove  and  blame  such  transgressors, 
as  behaving  themselves  in  a  disorderly  and  indecorous  man- 
ner, and  she  will  endeavor  to  bring  them  back  to  a  better 
mind. 


140 


JAMES  AKMINTUS. 


COEOLLAET. 

Is  it  not  useful,  for  the  purpose  of  bearing  testimony  to  the 
power  and  the  liberty  of  the  church,  occasionally  to  make 
some  change  in  the  laws  ecclesiastical,  lest  the  observance  of 
them  becoming  perpetual,  and  without  any  change,  should 
produce  an  opinion  of  the  [absolute]  necessity  of  their  being 
observed  ? 


DISPUTATION  LYII. 

ON  THE  rOWER  OF  THE  CHURCH  IN  ADMINISTERING  JUSTICE,  OR  ON 
ECCLESIASTICAL  DISCIPLINE. 

I.  As  NO  society,  however  rightly  constituted  and  furnished 
with  good  laws,  can  long  keep  together  unless  they  who  be- 
long to  it  be  restrained  within  their  duty  by  a  certain  method 
of  jurisdiction  or  discipline,  or  be  compelled  to  the  perform- 
ance of  their  duty,  so,  in  the  church,  which  is  the  house^  the 

city  and  the  hingdom  of  God^  discipline  of  the  same  kind  must  / 
flourish  and  be  exercised. 

II.  But  it  is  proper  that  this  discipline  be  accommodated 
to  the  spirilual  life,  and  not  to  that  which  is  natural;  and  that 
it  should  be  serviceable  for  edifying,  confirming,  amplifying 
and  adorning  the  church  as  such,  and  for  directing  conscien- 
ces, without  [employing]  any  force  hurtful  in  any  part  to  the 
body  or  \rei'\  to  the  substance,  and  to  the  condition  of  the  an- 
imal life  ;  unless,  perhaps,  it  be  the  pleasure  of  the  magistrate, 
in  virtue  of  the  power  granted  to  him  by  God,  to  force  an  of- 
fender to  repentance  by  some  other  method.  Such  a  proceed- 
ing, however,  we  do  not  prejudge. 

in.  But  ecclesiastical  discipline  is  an  act  of  the  church,  by 
which,  according  to  the  power  instituted  by  God  and  Christ, 
and  bestowed  on  her,  and  to  be  employed  through  a  conscious- 
ness of  the  office  imposed,  she  reprehends  all  and  every  one  of 
those  who  belong  to  the  church,  if  they  have  fallen  into  open  sin, 
and  admonishes  them  to  repent ;  or,  if  they  pertinaciously 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


141 


persevere  in  their  sins,  she  excommunicates  them,  to  the  be- 
nefit of  the  whole  church,  the  salvation  of  the  sinner  himself, 
to  the  profit  of  those  who  are  without,  and  to  the  glory  of  God 
himself  and  Christ. 

lY.  The  object  of  this  discipline  is  all  and  each  of  those 
who,  having  been  ingrafted  into  the  church  bj  baptism,  are 
capable  of  this  discipline  for  the  correction  of  themselves. 
The  cause  or  formal  condition  why  discipline  must  be  exer- 
cised on  them  is,  the  ofifences  committed  by  them,  whether 
they  concern  the  doctrine  of  faith,  and  are  pernicious  and  de- 
structive heresies,  or  whether  they  have  respect  to  morals  and 
to  the  rest  of  the  acts  of  the  christian  life. 

Y.  But  it  is  requisite,  that  these  sins  be  external  and  man- 
ifest, that  is,  known,  and  correctly  known,  to  those  by  whom 
the  discipline  shall  be  administered ;  and  that  it  be  evident, 
that  they  are  sins  according  to  the  laws  imposed  by  Christ 
on  the  church,  and  that  they  have  actually  been  committed. 
For  God,  alone,  judges  concerning  inward  sins. 

YI.  Let  the  form  of  administering  the  laws  be  with  all  kind- 
ness and  discretion,  also  with  zeal,  and  occasionally  with  se- 
verity and  some  degree  of  rigor,  if  occasion  require  it  to  be  em- 
ployed. But  the  intention  is,  the  salvation  of  him  who  has 
sinned,  and  that  of  the  whole  body  of  the  church,  to  the  glory 
of  God  and  of  Christ. 

YII.  The  execution  of  this  discipline  lies  both  in  admoni- 
tion and  in  castigation  or  punishment,  or  in  censm-e,  which  is 
conveyed  only  in  words,  through  reprehension,  exhortation 
and  communication,  or  which  is  given  by  the  privation  of 
some  of  those  things  which  outwardly  belong  to  the  commun- 
ion of  saints,  and  to  the  saving  edification  or  building  up  of 
every  believer  in  the  body  of  Christ. 

YIII.  Admonitions  are  accommodated,  first,  to  the  persons 
who  have  sinned,  in  which  must  be  observed  the  difference  of 
age,  sex  and  condition,  with  all  prudence  and  discretion. 
Secoxdlt.  They  are  accommodated  to  those  sins  which  have 
been  committed ;  for  some  are  more  grievous  than  others. 
Thiedlt.   To  the  mode  in  which  sins  have  been  perpetrated, 


142 


JAMES  AEMINIFS. 


which  mode  comes  now  under  our  special  consideration. 

IX.  For  some  sins  are  clandestine,  others  are  public,  wheth- 
er they  are  offences  only  against  God,  or  whether  they  have, 
in  union  with  such  offence,  injury  to  a  man's  neighbor.  Ac- 
cording to  this  latter  respect,  it  is  called  a  private  sin,"  that 
is,  an  offence  committed  by  one  private  individual  against  an- 
other— such  as  is  intimated  by  the  word  of  Christ,  in  Matthew 
xviii,  7-18,  in  which  passage  is  likewise  prescribed  the  mode 
[argitendi]  of  reproving  an  offence. 

X.  A  clandestine  sin  is  that  which  is  secretly  perpetrated, 
and  with  the  commission  of  which  very  few  persons  are  ac- 
quainted; to  this  belongs  a  secret  reprehension,  to  be  inflicted 
by  those  who  are  acquainted  with  it.  One  of  the  principal 
ministers  of  the  church,  however,  will  be  able  to  impart  au- 
thority to  the  reprehension  ;  yet  he  can,  by  no  means,  refer  it 
to  his  colleagues  ;  but  it  will  be  his  duty  to  deliver  this  reproof 
in  secret. 

XL  A  public  sin  is  that  which  is  committed  when  several 
people  are  acquainted  with  it.  We  allow  it  to  be  made  a 
subject  of  discussion,  whether  a  sin  ought  to  receive  the 
appellation  of  a  jpiiblio  one^  when  it  has  been  secretly  com- 
mitted but  has  become  known  to  many  persons  either  through 
the  fault  of  him  who  perpetrated  it,  or  through  the  officious- 
ness  of  those  who  divulged  it  without  necessity. 

XII.  But  there  is  still  some  difference  in  public  sins  ;  for 
they  are  known  either  to  some  part  of  the  church,  or  to  the 
whole,  or  nearly  to  the  whole  of  it ;  according  to  this  differ- 
ence, the  admonition  to  be  given  ought  to  be  varied.  If  the 
sin  be  known  to  jxirt  of  the  churchy  it  is  sufficient  that  the 
sinner  be  admonished  and  reproved  before  [senatu  ecclesias- 
tico]  the  consistory,  or  in  the  presence  of  more  persons  to 
whom  it  had  been  known.  If  it  be  known  to  the  whole  churchy 
the  sinner  must  be  reprehended  before  all  the  members ;  for 
this  practice  conduces  both  to  the  shame  of  him  who  has 
sinned,  and  to  deter  others  from  sinning  after  his  example. 
Some  consideration,  however,  may  be  had  to  the  shame  of  any 
offender,  and  a  degree  of  moderation  be  shewn ;  that  is,  if 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


143 


[eonsuetudine  non  tenetur]  he  is  not  deeply  versed  in  sinful 
practices,  but  if  a  sin  has  taken  him  by  surprise,  or  "  he  is 
overtaken  in  a  fault." 

Xni.  As  this  reproof  has  the  tendency  to  induce  the 
offender  to  desist  from  sinning,  if  this  end  is  not  obtained  by 
the  first  admonition,  it  is  necessary  to  repeat  it  occasionally, 
until  the  sinner  stands  corrected,  or  makes  an  open  declara- 
tion of  his  contumacy.  But  some  difference  of  opinion  exists 
on  this  point  among  divines  :  "  Is  it  useful  to  bring  an 
offender  to  punishment,  when,  after  having  afforded  hopes  of 
amendment,  he  does  not  fulfill  those  hopes  according  to  the 
judgment  and  the  wishes  of  the  church  V  But  it  does  not 
seem  possible  to  determine  this  so  much  by  settled  rules,  as 
by  leaving  the  matter  to  the  discretion  [prmuluni]  of  the 
governors  of  the  church. 

XIY.  But  if  the  offender  despise  all  admonitions,  and  con- 
tumaciously perseveres  in  his  sins,  after  the  church  has 
exercised  the  necessary  patience  towards  him,  she  must  pro- 
ceed to  punishment ;  which  is  excommunication,  that  is,  the 
exclusion  of  the  contumacious  person  from  the  holy  commun- 
ion and  even  from  the  church  herself  This  public  exclusion 
will  be  accompanied  by  the  avoidance  of  all  intercourse  and 
familiarity  with  the  person  excommunicated,  to  [the  obser- 
vance of]  which,  each  member  of  the  church  must  pay  attention, 
as  far  as  is  permitted  by  \_necessitas  qfficiorum]  the  necessary 
relative  duties  which  either  all  the  members  owe  to  him  ac- 
cording to  their  general  vocation,  or  some  of  them  owe 
according  to  their  particular  obligation. 

[For  a  subject  is  not  freed  from  his  obligation  toward  his 
prince,  on  account  of  the  excommunication  of  the  prince ; 
neither,  in  such  circumstances,  is  a  wife  freed  from  the  duty 
which  she  is  bound  to  perform  to  her  husband;  nor  are 
children  freed  from  their  duty  to  parents ;  and  thus  in  other 
similar  instances.] 

XY.  Some  persons  suppose,  that  this  excommunication  is 
solely  from  [usu\  the  privilege  of  celebrating  the  Lord's 
supper.  Others  suppose  it  to  be  of  two  kinds,  the  less  and 
the  greater — tJie  less  being  a  partial  exclusion  from  [usu] 


144 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


attendance  on  some  of  the  sacred  offices  of  the  church — the 
greater^  an  exclusion  from  all  of  them  together,  and  totally 
from  the  communion  of  believers.  But  others,  rejecting  the 
minor  excommunication,  acknowledge  no  other  than  the  major; 
because  it  appears  to  them,  that  there  is  no  cause  why  a  con- 
tumacious sinner  ought  to  be  rejected  from  this  communion 
more  than  from  that,  since  he  has  rendered  himself  unworthy 
to  obtain  any  place  in  the  church  and  the  assembly  of  saints. 
We  do  not  interpose  our  opinion  ;  but  we  leave  this  matter  to 
be  discussed  by  the  judgment  of  learned  and  pious  men,  that 
by  common  consent  it  may  be  concluded  from  the  Scriptures 
what  is  most  agreeable  to  them,  and  best  suited  to  the  edifica- 
tion of  the  church. 

COROLLARIES. 

Excommunication  must  be  avoided,  where  a  manifest  fear 
of  a  schism  exists. 

"Should  not  this  also  be  done,  where  a  fear  exists  of  perse- 
cution being  likely  to  ensue  on  account  of  excommunication  ?" 
We  think,  that,  in  this  case,  likewise,  excommunication  should 
be  avoided. 


DISPUTATIOJN^  LYni. 

COUNCILS. 

I.  An  ecclesiastical  council  is  an  assembly  of  men  gathered 
together  in  the  name  of  God,  consulting  and  defining  or 
settling,  according  to  the  word  of  God,  about  those  things 
which  pertain  to  religion  and  the  good  of  the  church,  for  the 
glory  of  God  and  the  salvation  of  the  church. 

II.  The  power  of  appointing  an  assembly  of  this  kind  resides 
in  the  church  herself.  If  she  is  under  the  sway  of  [Jidelis]  a 
Christian  magistrate,  who  makes  an  oj)en  profession  of  reli- 
gion, or  who  publicly  tolerates  it,  then  we  transfer  this  power 
to  such  a  magistrate,  without  whose  conyocation,  those  persons 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


145 


that  protested  to  the  church  concerning  the  nullity  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  have  maintained  that  a  council  is  illegitimate. 
But  if  the  magistrate  is  neither  a  believer,  nor  publicly  toler- 
ates religion,  but  is  an  enemy  and  a  persecutor,  then  those 
who  preside  in  the  church  will  discharge  that  office. 

III.  An  occasion  will  be  afforded  for  convening  an  assembly 
of  this  kind,  either  by  some  evil  men  who  \noxam  mferunt\ 
are  an  annoyance  to  the  church,  whether  they  be  in  the  church 
or  out  of  it,  or  even  the  perpetual  constitution  of  the  church 
80  long  as  she  continues  on  earth.  Tor  as  she  is  liable  to 
error,  corruption,  and  defection  from  the  truth  of  doctrine, 
from  the  purity  of  divine  worship,  from  moral  probity  and 
from  Christian  concord,  to  heresies,  idolatry,  corruption  of 
manners,  and  schisms,  it  is  useful  for  assemblies  of  this  kind 
to  be  instituted.  Yet  may  they  be  instituted,  not  only  to 
correct  any  corruption  if  it  manifestly  appears  that  it  has 
entered,  but  likewise  to  inquire  whether  something  of  the 
kind  has  not  entered ;  because  the  enemy  sows  tares  while  the 
men  sleep,  to  whom  is  entrusted  the  safe  custody  of  the  Lord's 
field. 

lY.  We  say  that  this  is  an  assembly  of  men  ;  for,  "  Let  a 
woman  keep  silence  in  the  church,  unless  she  has  an  extraor- 
dinary and  divine  call ;  and  we  say,  these  men  ought  to  be 
distinguished  by  the  following  marks;  Fiest.  That  they  be 
powerful  in  the  Scriptures,  and  have  their  senses  exercised  in 
them.  Secondly.  That  they  be  pious,  grave,  prudent,  mod- 
erate, and  lovers  of  divine  truth  and  of  the  peace  of  the 
church.  Thirdly.  That  they  be  free,  and  bound  down  to  no 
person,  church,  or  confession  written  by  men,  but  only  to  God 
and  Christ,  and  to  his  word. 

Y.  They  are  men,  whether  of  the  ecclesiastical  or  of  the 
political  class — in  the  first  place,  the  supreme  magistrate  him- 
self, and  those  persons  who  discharge  any  public  office  in  the 
church  and  the  republic.  Then,  also,  private  individuals,  even 
those  persons  not  being  excluded  who  maintain  some  other 
[doctrine]  than  that  which  is  the  current  opinion,  provided 
they  be  furnished  with  the  endowments  which  I  have  de- 
scribed. (Thesis  lY.)    And  we  are  of  opinion  that  such  per- 


4- 


146  JAMES  AEMINTUS. 

sons  may  deliver  not  only  a  deliberative  but  likewise  a  decisive 
sentence. 

YI.  The  object  about  wliich  the  council  will  be  engaged  is, 
the  things  appertaining  to  religion  and  to  the  good  of  the 
church  as  such.  These  are  comprised  under  two  chief  heads— 
the  primary^  comprehending  the  doctrine,  itself,  of  faith,  hope, 
and  charity,  and  the  secondary^  the  order  and  polity  of  the 
church. 

YII.  The  rule,  according  to  which  deliberation  must  be 
instituted,  and  decision  must  be  formed,  is  that  single  and  sole 
one — the  word  of  God,  who  holds  absolute  dominion  in  the 
church.  But  in  things  which  belong  to  the  good  order  and 
eurafiav  the  discipline  of  the  church,  it  is  allowable  for  the 
members  attentively  to  consider  the  present  state  of  the  com- 
monwealth and  of  the  church,  and  to  exercise  deliberation  and 
form  decisions  according  to  the  circumstances  of  places,  times 
and  persons,  provided  one  thing  be  guarded  against — to  de- 
termine nothing  contrary  to  the  word  of  God. 

YIII.  But,  because  all  things  in  assemblies  of  this  kind 
ought  to  be  done  in  order,  it  is  requisite  that  some  one  preside 
over  the  whole  council.  If  the  chief  magistrate  be  present, 
this  office  belongs  to  him  ;  but  he  can  devolve  this  charge  on 
some  other  person,  whether  an  ecclesiastic  or  layman  ;  nay,  he 
may  commit  this  matter  to  the  council  itself,  provided  he  take 
care  that  all  and  each  of  the  members  be  restrained  within  the 
bounds  of  their  duty,  lest  their  judgments  be  concluded  in  a 
tumultuous  manner.  But  it  is  useful  that  some  bishop  be 
appointed,  who  may  perform  the  offices  of  prayer  and  thanks- 
giving, may  propose  tlie  business  to  be  transacted,  and  may 
inquire  and  collect  [sententias]  the  opinions  and  votes ;  indeed, 
so  far,  he,  as  an  ecclesiastic,  is  the  more  suitable  for  fulfilling 
these  duties. 

IX.  A  place  must  be  appointed  for  assemblies  of  this  kind, 
that  they  may  be  most  commodious  to  all  those  who  shall 
come  to  the  synod,  unless  it  be  the  pleasure  of  the  chief 
magistrate  to  choose  that  place  which  will  be  the  most  con- 
venient to  himself.  It  ought  to  be  a  place  secure  from  ambus- 
cade or  hostile  surprise ;  and  a  safe  conduct  is  necessary  for 


PRIVATB  DISPUTATIONS. 


147 


all  persons,  that  they  may  arrive  and  depart  again,  without 
personal  detriment,  as  far  as  is  allowable  by  the  law  of  God 
itself,  against  which  the  authority  of  no  council,  however 
great,  is  of  the  least  avail. 

X.  The  authority  of  councils  is  not  absolute,  but  dependent 
on  the  authority  of  God ;  for  this  reason,  no  one  is  simply 
bound  to  assent  to  those  things  which  have  been  decreed  in  a 
council,  unless  those  persons  be  present,  as  members,  who 
cannot  err,  and  who  have  the  undoubted  marks  and  testimo- 
nies of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  this  fact.  But  every  one  may,  nay, 
he  is  bound,  to  examine,  by  the  word  of  God,  those  things 
which  have  been  concluded  in  the  council ;  and  if  he  finds 
them  to  be  agreeable  to  the  divine  word,  then  he  may  approve 
of  them  ;  but  if  they  are  not,  then  he  may  express  his  disap- 
probation. Yet  he  must  be  cautious  not  easily  to  reject  that 
which  has  been  determined  by  the  unanimous  consent  of  so 
many  pious  and  learned  men  ;  but  he  ought  diligently  to  con- 
sider, whether  it  has  the  Scrij)tures  pronouncing  in  favor  of  it 
with  sufficient  clearness ;  and  when  this  is  the  case,  he  may 
yield  his  assent,  in  the  Lord,  to  their  unanimous  agreement. 

XL  The  necessity  of  councils  is  not  absolute,  because  the 
church  can  be  instructed  respecting  necessary  things  without 
them.  Yet  their  utility  is  very  great,  if,  being  instituted  in 
the  name  of  the  Lord,  they  examine  all  things  according  to  his 
word,  and  appoint  that  which,  by  common  consent,  according 
to  that  rule,  the  members  have  thought  proper  to  pronounce 
as  their  decision.  For,  as  many  eyes  see  more  than  one  eye, 
and  as  the  Lord  is  accustomed  to  listen  to  the  prayers  [multo- 
Tum\  of  a  number  who  agree  together  among  themselves  on  eai^;h, 
it  is  more  probable  that  the  truth  will  be  discovered  and  confirmed 
from  the  Scriptures  by  some  council  consisting  of  many  learn- 
ed and  pious  men,  than  by  the  exertions  of  a  single  individual 
transacting  the  same  business  privately  by  himself. 

From  these  premises,  we  also  say  that  the  authority  of  any 
council  is  greater  than  that  of  any  man  who  is  present  at  such 
council,  even  that  of  the  Roman  pontifi^,  to  whom  we  ascribe 
no  other  right  in  any  council,  than  that  which  we  give  to  any 
bishop,  even  at  the  time  when  he  performed  with  fidelity  the 


148 


JAMES  ABMINIUS. 


duties  of  a  true  bishop.  So  far,  are  we  disinclined  to  believe, 
that  no  council  can  be  convened  and  held  without  his  com- 
mand, presidency  and  direction. 

XIII.  No  council  can  prescribe  to  its  successors,  that  they 
may  not  again  deliberate  about  that  which  has  been  transacted 
and  determined  in  preceding  councils ;  because  the  matter  of 
religion  does  not  come  [in  prcBjudicatum]  under  the  denomi- 
nation of  a  thing  that  is  prejudged  ;  neither  can  any  council 
bind  itself,  by  an  oath,  to  the  observance  of  any  other  word 
than  that  of  God  ;  much  less  can  it  make  positive  laws,  to 
which  it  may  bind  either  itself,  or  any  man,  by  an  oath. 

Xiy.  It  is  also  allowable  for  a  later  ecumenical  or  general 
coimcil  to  call  in  doubt  that  which  had  been  decreed  by  a  prece- 
ding general  council,  because  it  is  possible  even  for  general  coun- 
cils to  err ;  nor  yet  does  it  follow  from  these  premises  that  the  cath- 
olic church  en-s  ;   that  is,  that  all  the  faithful  universally  err. 


DISPUTATIOl^  LIX. 

ox  THE  ECCLESIASTICAL  MINISTRATIONS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT, 
AND  ON  THE  VOCATION  TO  THEM. 

I.  By  the  word  "  ministry ^^"^  we  designate  a  public  auxiliary 
oflSce  or  duty,  subservient  to  a  superior,  who,  in  this  instance, 
is  God  and  Christ  as  he  is  the  Lord  and  Head  of  the  church. 
It  receives  the  appellation  of  ecdesiasticaV^  from  its  object, 
which  is  the  church ;  and  we  distinguish  it  from  a  politi- 
cal ministry,  which  exercises  itself  in  the  civil  affairs  of  the 
commonwealth. 

II.  But  it  is  the  public  duty  which  God  has  committed  to 
certain  men,  to  collect  a  church,  [curandi]  to  attend  to  it  when 
collected,  and  to  bring  it  to  Christ,  its  Head,  and  through  him 
to  God,  that  [the  members  of]  it  may  attain  a  life  of  happi- 
ness, to  the  glory  of  God  and  Christ. 

HI.  But  as  a  church  consists  of  men  who  live  [animalem] 
a  natural  life,  and  are  called  to  live  [in  ilia]  while  in  the  body, 
a  spiritual  life,  which  is  superior  and  ought  to  be  as  the  end  of 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


149 


the  other,  there  is  a  two-fold  office  to  be  performed  in  the 
church  according  to  the  exigencies  both  of  the  natural  and  of 
the  spiritual  life  :  The  fiest  is  that  which  is  properly,  jper  se^ 
and  immediately  occupied  about  the  spiritual  life,  its  com- 
mencement, progress  and  confirmation  ;  the  second  is  that  by 
which  the  natural  life  is  sustained,  and,  therefore,  it  belongs, 
only  by  accident  and  mediately,  to  the  church.  The  fisst  is 
always  necessary  per  se.  The  second  is  not  necessary  [in  the 
church]  except  by  hypothesis ;  because  there  are  those  who 
need  a  maintenance  from  others,  and  they  do  not  obtain  this 
through  some  order  established  in  the  community,  in  which 
case,  it  ought  always  to  endure  ;  [citra  ilium]  but  where  any 
such  order  is  established,  it  is  unnecessary.  On  the  former  of 
these  we  are  now  treating ;  about  the  latter  we  have  no  fur- 
ther remarks  to  make. 

lY.  The  office  accommodated  to  the  spiritual  life,  consists  of 
these  three  acts  :  The  first  is  the  [mstitutio]  teaching  of  the 
truth  which  is  according  to  godliness  ;  the  second  is  interces- 
sion before  God  ;  the  third  is  regimen  or  government  accom- 
modated to  this  institution  or  teaching. 

Y.  1.  Institution  or  teaching  consists  in  the  proposing,  ex- 
planation and  confirmation  of  the  truth,  which  contains  the 
things  that  are  to  be  believed,  hoped  for,  and  performed,  in 
the  refutation  of  falsehood,  in  exhortation,  reprehension,  con- 
solation, and  threatening,  all  of  which  is  accomplished  by  the 
word  both  of  the  law  and  the  gospel.  To  this  function,  we 
add  the  administration  of  the  sacraments,  which  serve  for  the 
same  purpose. 

YI.  2.  Intercession  consists  in  prayers  and  thanksgivings 
offered  to  God  for  the  church  and  each  of  its  members,  through 
Christ  our  only  advocate  and  intercessor. 

YII.  3.  The  government  of  the  church  is  used  for  this  end, 
that,  in  the  whole  church,  all  things  may  be  done  decently, 
in  order,  and  to  edification  ;  and  that  each  of  its  members 
may  be  kept  in  their  duty,  the  loiterers  may  be  incited,  the 
weak  confirmed,  those  who  have  wandered  out  of  the  way 
brought  back,  the  contumacious  punished,  and  the  penitents 
received. 


150 


JAMES  AEMnmJS. 


YIII.  These  offices  are  not  always  imposed  in  the  same 
mode,  nor  administered  by  the  same  [rationihus]  methods. 
For,  at  the  commencement  of  the  rising  Christian  church, 
thej^  were  imposed  on  some  men  immediately  by  God  and 
Christ,  and  they  were  administered  by  those  on  whom  they 
had  been  imposed,  without  binding  them  to  certain  churches ; 
hence,  also,  the  apostles  were  called  "  ministers^^'*  as  being  the 
ambassadors  of  Christ  to  every  creature  throughout  the  world. 
To  these  were  added  the  evangelists,  as  fellow-laborers.  Af- 
terwards [the  same  offices  were  imposed]  mediately  on  those 
who  were  called  pastors  2i]i^  teachers^  hishops  and  priests^  and 
who  were  placed  over  certain  churches.  The  former  of  these 
[the  apostles  and  evangelists]  continued  only  for  a  season,  and 
had  no  successors.  The  latter  [pastors,  &c.]  will  remain  in 
perpetual  succession  to  the  end  of  the  world,  though  we  do 
not  deny  that,  when  a  church  is  first  to  be  collected  for  any 
one,  a  man  may  traverse*  the  whole  [terram]  earth  in  teaching. 

IX.  These  offices  are  so  ordered,  that  one  person  can  dis- 
charge all  of  them  at  the  same  time ;  though,  if  the  utility 
of  the  church  and  the  diversity  of  gifts  so  require,  they  can 
be  variously  distributed  among  different  men. 

X.  The  vocation  to  such  ecclesiastical  offices  is  either  imme- 
diate or  mediate.  Immediate  vocation  we  wilj  not  now  dis- 
cuss. But  that  which  is  mediate  is  a  divine  act,  administered 
by  God  and  Christ  through  the  church,  by  which  he  conse- 
crates to  himself  a  man  separated  from'  [w5w]  the  occupations 
of  the  natural  life  and  from  those  which  are  common,  and 
removes  him  to  the  duties  of  the  pastoral  office,  for  the  salva- 
tion of  men  and  his  own  glory.  In  this  vocation,  we  ought 
to  consider  the  vocation  itself,  its  efficient  and  its  object. 

XI.  1.  The  act  of  vocation  consists  of  previous  examina- 
tion, election,  and  confirmation.  (1.)  Examination  is  a  dili- 
gent inquiry  and  trial,  whether  the  person  about  whom  it  is 
occupied  be  well  suited  for  fulfilling  the  duties  of  the  office. 
This  fitness  consists  in  the  knowledge  and  approval  of  things 
true  and  necessary,  in  probity  of  life,  and  a  facility  of  com- 
municating to  others  those  things  which  he  knows  himself, 
(which  facility  contains  language  and  freedom  in  speaking,) 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


151 


in  prudence,  moderation  of  mind,  patient  endurance  of  labors, 
infirmities,  injuries,  &c. 

XII.  Election,  or  choice,  is  the  ordination  of  a  person  who 
is  legitimately  examined  and  found  [prcdce]  good  and  proper, 
bj  which  is  imposed  on  him  the  office  to  be  discharged.  To 
this,  it  is  not  unusual  to  add  some  public  inauguration,  by 
prayers  and  the  laying  on  of  hands,  and  also  by  previous 
fasting  and  is  like  an  admission  to  the  administration  of  the  of- 
fice itself,  which  is  commonly  denominated  "  confirmatio7i.^'' 

XIII.  2.  The  primary  efficient  is  God  and  Christ,  and  the 
Spirit  of  both  as  conducting  the  cause  of  Christ  in  the  church, 
on  which  cause  the  whole  authority  of  the  vocation  depends. 
The  administrator  is  the  church  itself,  in  which  we  number 
the  Christian  magistrate,  teachers,  with  the  rest  of  the  pres- 
byters, and  the  people  themselves.  But  in  those  places  in 
which  no  magistrate  resides  who  is  willing  to  attend  to  this 
matter,  there,  bishops  or  presbyters,  with  the  people,  can  and 
ought  to  perform  this  business. 

XI Y.  The  object  is  the  person  to  be  called,  in  whom  is  re- 
quired, for  the  sake  of  the  church,  that  aptitude  or  suitable- 
ness about  which  we  have  already  spoken,  and  on  account  of 
it,  the  testimony  of  a  good  conscience,  by  which  he  modestly 
approves  the  judgment  of  the  church,  and  is  conscious  to  him- 
self that  he  enters  on  this  office  in  the  sincere  fear  of  God, 
and  with  an  intense  desire  only  to  edify  the  church. 

XY.  The  essential  form  of  the  vocation  is  that  all  things 
may  be  done  according  to  the  rule  prescribed  in  the  word  of 
God.  The  accidental  is,  tli-it  they  may  all  be  done  decently 
and  suitably,  according  to  the  particular  relations  of  persons, 
places,  times,  and  other  circumstances. 

XYI.  Wheresoever  all  these  conditions  are  observed,  the 
call  is  legitimate,  and  on  every  part  approved  ;  but  if  some 
one  be  deficient,  the  act  of  vocation  is  then  imperfect ;  yet  the 
call  is  to  be  considered  as  ratified  and  firm,  while  the  vocation 
of  God  is  united  by  some  outward  testimony  of  it,  which,  be- 
cause it  is  various,  we  cannot  define. 


152 


JAMES  AKMINnjS. 


COKOLLAKT. 

The  vocations  or  calls  in  tlie  papal  church  have  not  been 
null,  though  contaminated  and  imperfect ;  and  the  first  reform- 
ers had  an  ordinary  and  mediate  call. 


DISPUTATIOISr  LX. 

ON  SACRAMENTS  IN  GENERAL. 

We  have  thus  far  treated  on  the  church,  her  power,  and  the  ministry  of  the 
xBord;  it  follows  that  we  now  di&cuss~ those  signs  or  marks  which  God  appends  to 
his  word,  and  by  which  He  seals  and  confirms  the  faith  which  has  been  produced 
in  the  minds  of  his  covenant  people.  For  these  signs  are  commonly  called  "sac- 
raments^'— a  term,  indeed,  which  is  not  employed  in  the  Scriptures,  but  which,  on 
account  of  the  agreement  about  it  in  the  church,  must  not  be  rejected. 

I.  Bu-r  this  word,  "  sacrament,"  is  transferred  from  milita- 
ry usage  to  that  of  sacred  things  ;  for,  as  soldiers  were  devoted 
to  their  general  by  an  oath,  as  by  a  solemn  attestation,  so,  like- 
wise, those  in  covenant  are  bound  to  Christ  by  their  reception 
of  these  signs,  as  by  a  public  oath.  But  because  the  same 
word  is  either  taken  in  a  relative  acceptation,  (and  this  either 
properly  for  a  sign,  or  by  metonymy  for  the  thing  signified,) 
or  in  an  absolute  acceptation,  (and  this  by  synecdoche  for 
both,)  we  will  treat  about  its  proper  signification. 

II.  A  sacrament,  therefore,  is  a  sacred  and  visible  sign  or 
token  and  seal  instituted  by  God,  by  which  [obsignat']  he  rati- 
fies  to  his  covenant  people  the  gracious  promise  proposed  in 
his  word,  and  binds  them,  on  the  other  hand,  to  the  perform^ 
ance  of  their  duty.  Therefore,  no  other  promises  are  proposed 
to  us  by  these  signs  than  those  which  are  manifested  in  the 
word. 

III.  We  call  it  "  a  sign  or  token,  and  a  seal,  both  from  the 
usage  of  Scripture  in  Genesis  xvii,  11,  and  Romans  iv,  11, 
and  from  the  nature  of  the  thing  itself,  because  these  tokens, 
beside  the  external  appearance  which  they  present  to  our  sen- 


PKIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


153 


ses,  [facivMt  aliud]  cause  something  else  to  occur  to  the 
thoughts,  x^either  are  they  only  naked  significant  tokens,  but 
seals  and  pledges,  which  affect  not  only  the  mind,  but  likewise 
the  heart  itself. 

lY.  We  call  it  "sacred"  in  a  two-fold  respect:  (1.)  Be- 
cause it  has  been  given  by  God  ;  and  (2.)  Because  it  is  given 
to  a  sacred  use.  We  call  it  "  visible,"  becausef  it  is  of  the  na- 
ture of  a  sign  that  it  be  perceptible  to  the  senses ;  for  that  which 
is  not  such,  cannot  be  called  a  sign. 

Y.  The  author  of  these  signs  is  God,  who  alone,  is  the  lord 
and  lawgiver  of  the  church,  and  whose  province  it  is  to  pre- 
scribe laws,  to  make  promises,  and  to  seal  them  with  those 
tokens  which  have  seemed  good  to  himself ;  yet  they  are  so 
accommodated  to  the  grace  to  be  sealed,  as,  by  a  certain  anal- 
ogy, to  be  significant  of  it.  Therefore,  they  are  not  natural 
signs,  which,  from  their  own  nature,  signify  all  that  of  which 
they  are  significant ;  but  they  are  voluntary  si  gns,  the  whole 
signification  of  which  depends  on  the  will  or  option  of  him 
who  institutes  them. 

YI.  The  matter  is  the  external  element  itself  created  by 
God,  and,  therefore,  subject  to  his  power,  and  made  suitable 
to  seal  that  which,  according  to  his  wisdom,  God  wills  to  be 
sealed  by  it. 

YII.  As  the  internal  form  of  the  sacrament  is  sx  rwv  T^^og  ti, 
of  things  to  their  relation,  it  consists  in  relation,  and  is  that 
suitable  analogy  and  similitude  between  the  sign  and  the  thing 
signified  which  has  regard  both  to  the  representation,  and  to 
the  sealing  or  witnessing,  and  the  exhibition  of  the  thing  sig- 
nified through  the  authority  and  the  will  of  him  who  institutes 
it.  From  this  most  close  analogy  of  the  sign  with  the  thing 
signified,  various  figurative  expressions  are  employed  in  the 
Scriptures  and  in  the  sacraments  :  as,  when  the  name  of  the 
thing  signified  is  ascribed  to  the  sign,  thus,  "And  my  cove- 
nant shall  be  in  your  flesh ;"  (Gen.  xvii,  13  ;)  and,  on?  the 
contrary,  in  1  Corinthians  v,  7,  "  Christ,  our  passover,  is  sac- 
rificed for  us."  Or,  when  the  property  of  the  thing  is,  ascrib- 
ed to  the  sign,  as,  "Whosoever  drinketh  of  the  water  that  I 

11  ^    ^  TOL  II. 


164 


JAMES  AEMINnJS. 


shall  give  him,  shall  never  thirst."  (John  iv,  14.)  And,  on 
the  contrary,  "Take,  eat;  this  is  my  body."   (Matt,  xxvi,  26.) 

YII.  The  end  of  sacraments  is  two-fold,  proximate  and 
remote.  T\\q  proximate  end  is  the  sealing  of  the  promise  made 
in  the  covenant.  The  remote  end  is,  (1,)  the  confirmation  of 
the  faith  of  those  who  are  in  the  covenant,  and  by  consequence 
the  salvaton  of  the  church  that  consists  of  those  covenanted 
members  ;  and  (2,)  the  glory  of  God. 

IX.  Those  for  whom  the  sacraments  have  been  instituted 
by  God,  and  by  whom  they  are  to  be  used,  are  those  with 
whom  God  has  entered  into  covenant,  all  of  them,  and  they 
only.  To  them  the  use  of  the  sacraments  is  to  be  conceded, 
as  long  as  tliey  are  reckoned  by  God  in  the  number  of  those 
who  are  in  covenant ;  though  by  their  sins  they  have  deserved 
to  be  cast  off  and  divorced. 

X.  But  these  sacraments  are  to  be  considered  according 
to  the  varied  conditions  of  men ;  for  they  have  either  been 
instituted  before  the  fall,  and  are  of,  the  covenant  of  works ; 
or,  after  the  fall,  and  are  of  the  covenant  of  grace.  There  was 
only  a  single  sacrament  of  the  covenant;  of  works,  and  that  was 
the  tree  of  life.  Those  of  the  covenant  of  grace  are  either  so 
far  as  they  have  regard  to  the  promised  covenant,  and  belong 
to  the  church  while  yet  in  her  infancy  and  placed  under  pedagogy 
[the  law  being  her  schoolmaster]  as  were  those  of  circumcision 
and  of  the  passover  ;  or  so  far  as  now  they  have  regard  to  the 
covenant  confirmed,  and  belong  to  the  christian  church  that 
is  of  adult  age,  as  are  those  of  baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper. 
The  points  of  agreement  and  difference  between  each  of  these 
will  be  the  more  conveniently  perceived  in  the  discussion  of 
each. 

COEOLLARY. 

Though  in  some  things,  sacrifices  and  sacraments  agree  to- 
gether, yet  they  are  by  no  means  to  be  confounded  ;  because 
in  many  respects  the  latter  differ  from  the  former. 


miVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


155 


DISPUTATION  LXI. 

ON  THE  SACRAMENTS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT,  THE  TREE  OF  LIFE, 
CIECUMCISICN,  AND  THE  PASCHAL  LAMB. 

I.  The  tree  of  life  was  created  and  instituted  by  God  for 
this  end — that  man,  as  long  as  he  remained  obedient  to  the 
divine  law,  might  eat  of  its  fruit,  both  for  the  preservation 
and  continuance  of  this  natural  life  against  every  defect  which 
could  happen  to  it  through  old  age,  or  any  other  cause,  and  to 
designate  or  point  out  the  promise  of  a  better  and  more  bliss- 
ful life.  It  answered  the  former  purpose,  as  an  element  crea- 
ted by  God  ;  and  the  latter,  as  a  sacrament  instituted  by  God. 
It  was  adapted  to  accomplish  the  former  purpose  by  the  nat- 
ural force  and  capability  which  was  imparted  to  it ;  it  was 
fitted  for  the  latter,  on  account  of  the  similitude  and  analogy 
which  subsist  between  natural  and  spiritual  life.  , 

II.  Circumcision  is  the  sign  of  the  covenant  into  which  God 
entered  with  Abraham  to  seal  or  witness  the  promise  about 
the  blessed  seed  that  should  be  born  of  him,  about  all  nations 
which  were  to  be  blessed  in  him,  and  about  constituting  him 
the  father  of  many  nations,  and  the  heir  of  the  world  through 
the  righteousness  of  faith  ;  and  that  God  was  willing  to  be  his 
God  and  the  God  of  his  seed  after  him.  This  sign  was  to  be 
administered  in  that  member  which  is  the  ordained  instrument 
of  generation  in  the  male  sex,  by  a  suitable  analogy  between 
the  sign  and  the  thing  signified. 

III.  By  that  sign  all  the  male  descendants  from  Abraham, 
were,  at  the  express  command  of  God,  to  be  marked,  on  the 
eighth  day  after  their  nativity ;  and  a  threatening  was  added, 
that  it  should  come  to  pass  that  the  soul  of  him  who  was 
not  circumcised  on  that  day  should  be  cut  off  from  his 
people. 

lY.  But  though  females  were  not  circumcised  in  their 
bodies,  yet  they  were  in  the  mean  time  partakers  of  the  same 
covenant  and  obligation,  because  they  were  reckoned  among 


156 


JAMES  AKMINITS. 


the  men,  and  were  considered  by  God  as  circumcised.  It, 
therefore,  was  not  necessary  that  God  should  institute  any 
other  remedy  for  taking  away  from  females  the  native  corrup- 
tion of  sin,  as  the  papists  have  the  audacity  to  affirm,  beyond 
and  contrary  to  the  Scriptures. 

Y.  And  this  is  the  first  relation  of  circumcision  belonffinor 
to  the  promise.  The  other  is,  that  the  persons  circumcised 
were  bound  to  the  observance  of  the  whole  law,  delivered  by 
God,  and  especially  of  the  ceremonial  law.  For  it  was  in  the 
power  of  God  to  prescribe,  to  those  who  were  in  covenant  with 
him,  a  law  at  his  pleasure,  and  to  seal  the  obligation  of  its  ob- 
servance by  such  a  sign  of  the  covenant  as  had  been  previ- 
ously instituted  and  employed  ;  and  in  this  respect  circumcis- 
ion belongs  to  the  Old  Testament. 

YI.  The  paschal  lamb  was  a  sacrament,  instituted  by 
God  [ohsignandum]  to  point  out  the  deliverance  from  Egypt, 
and  to  renew  the  remembrance  of  it  at  a  stated  time  in 
each  year. 

YII.  Beside  this  use,  it  served  typically  to  adumbrate 
Christ,  the  tme  Lamb,  who  was  to  endure  and  bear  away  the 
sins  of  the  world  ;  on  which  account,  also,  its  use  was  abroga- 
ted by  the  sufferings  and  [immolatio]  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  on 
the  cross,  as  it  relates  to  the  right ;  but  it  was  afterwards,  in 
fact  and  reality,  abrogated  with  the  destruction  of  the  city  and 
the  temple. 

YIII.  The  sacrament  of  the  tree  of  life  was  a  bloodless  one ; 
in  the  other  two,  there  was  shedding  of  blood — both  suitable 
to  the  diversity  of  the  state  of  those  who  were  in  covenant  with 
God.  For  the  former  was  instituted  before  the  entrance  of  sin 
into  the  world ;  but  the  two  latter,  after  sin  had  entered,  which, 
according  to  the  decree  of  God,  is  not  expiated  except  by 
blood ;  because  the  wages  of  sin  is  death,  and  natural  life, 
according  to  the  Scriptures,  has  its  seat  in  the  blood. 

IX.  The  passage  under  the  cloud  and  through  the  sea, 
manna,  and  the  water  which  gushed  from  the  rock,  were  sac- 
ramental signs ;  but  they  were  extraordinary,  and  as  a  sort  of 
prelude  to  the  sacraments  of  the  New  Testament,  although  of 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


157 


a  sioTiificatioii  and  testification  the  most  obscure,  since  the 
things  signified  and  witnessed  by  them  were  not  declared  in 
express  words. 

COEOLL  ARIES. 

I.  It  is  probable  that  the  church,  from  the  primitive  prom- 
ise and  reparation  after  the  fall,  until  the  times  of  Abraham, 
had  her  sacraments,  though  no  express  mention  is  made  of 
them  in  the  Scriptures. 

n.  It  would  be  an  act  of  too  great  boldness  to  affirm  what 
those  sacraments  were ;  yet  if  any  one  should  say,  that  the 
first  of  them  was  the  offering  of  the  infant  recently  born  be- 
fore the  Lord,  on  the  very  day  on  which  the  mother  was  puri- 
fied from  childbearing,  and  that  another  was,  the  eating  of 
sacrifices  and  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  the  victims ; 
his  assertion  would  not  be  utterly  devoid  of  probability. 


DISPUTATION^  LXn. 

ON  THE  SACRAMENTS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  IN  GENERAL. 

I.  The  sacraments  of  the  ISTew  Testament  are  those  which 
have  been  instituted  for  giving  testimony  to  the  covenant,  or 
the  'New  Testament  confirmed  by  the  death  and  blood  of  its 
mediator  and  testator. 

II.  Wherefore,  it  was  necessary  that  they  should  be  such  as 
were  adapted  to  give  significance  and  testimony  to  the  con- 
firmation already  made  ;  that  is,  that  they  should  declare  and 
testify  that  the  blood  had  been  shed,  and  that  the  death  of  the 
mediator  had  intervened. 

III.  There  ought,  therefore,  to  be  no  shedding  of  blood  in 
the  sacraments  of  the  ISTew  Testament ;  neither  ought  they  to 
consist  of  any  such  thing  as  is  or  has  been  partaker  of  the  life 
which  is  in  the  blood  ;  for  as  sin  has  now  been  expiated,  and 


158 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


remission  fully  obtained  through  the  blood  and  death  of  the 
mediator,  no  further  shedding  of  blood  was  necessary. 

lY.  But  they  were  to  be  instituted  before  the  confirmation 
of  the  new  covenant  was  made  by  the  blood  of  the  mediator 
and  the  death  of  the  testator  himself ;  both  because  the  insti- 
tution and  the  sealing  oi  the  testament  ought  to  precede  even 
the  death  of  the  testator  ;  and  because  the  mediator  himself 
ought  to  be  a  partaker  of  these  sacraments,  to  consecrate  them 
in  his  own  person,  and  more  strongly  to  seal  the  covenant 
which  is  between  us  and  him. 

Y.  But  as  the  communion  of  a  sacrifice  unto  death,  ofiered 
for  sins,  is  signified  and  testified  by  nothing  more  appropriately 
than  by  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  and  the  eating  of  the 
sacrifice  itself  and  the  drinking  of  the  blood,  (if  indeed  it  were 
allowable  to  drink  blood,)  hence,  likewise,  no  signs  were  more 
appropriate  than  water,  bread  and  wine,  since  the  sprinkling 
of  his  very  blood  and  the  eating  of  his  body  could  not  be  done, 
and,  besides,  the  drinking  of  his  blood  ought  not  to  be  done. 

YI.  The  virtue  and  efiicacy  of  the  sacraments  of  the  Xew 
Testament  do  not  go  beyond  the  act  of  signifying  and  testify- 
ing. There  can  neither  actually  be,  nor  be  imagined,  any 
exhibition  of  the  thing  signified  through  them,  except  such  as 
is  completed  by  these  intermediate  acts  themselves. 

YII.  And,  therefore,  the  sacraments  of  the  ISTew  Testament 
do  not  difier  from  those  used  in  the  Old  Testament ;  because 
the  former  exhibit  grace,  but  the  latter  typify  or  prefigure  it. 

YIII.  The  sacraments  of  the  Xew  Testament  have  not  the 
ratio  of  sacraments  beyond  that  very  use  for  the  sake  of  which 
they  were  instituted,  nor  do  tliey  profit  those  who  use  them 
without  faith  and  repentance  ;  that  is,  those  persons  who  are 
of  adult  age,  and  of  whom  faith  and  repentance  are  required. 
Kespecting  infants,  the  judgment  is  difierent,  to  whom  it  is 
sufficient  that  they  are  the  ofispring  of  believing  parents,  that 
they  may  be  reckoned  in  the  covenant. 

IX.  The  sacraments  of  the  'New  Testament  have  been  in- 
stituted, that  they  may  endure  to  the  end  of  time  ;  and  they 
will  endure  till  the  end  of  all  things. 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


159 


COROLLARY. 

The  diversity  of  sects  in  the  Christian  religion  does  not 
excuse  tlie  omission  of  the  use  of  the  sacraments,  though  the 
vehemence  of  the  leaders  of  any  sect  may  afford  a  legitimate 
and  sufficient  cause  to  the  people  to  abstain  justly  and  without 
sin  from  the  use  of  the  sacraments  of  which  such  men  have  to 
become  partakers  with  them. 


DISPUTATIOJS"  LXIII. 

ON  BAPTISM  AND  P^DO-BAPTISM. 

I.  Baptism  is  the  initial  sacrament  of  the  'New  Testament, 
by  which  the  covenant  people  of  God  are  sprinkled  with  water, 
by  a  minister  of  the  church,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  ^  Ghost — to  signify  and  to  testify  the 
spiritual  ablution  which  is  effected  by  the  blood  and  Spirit  of 
Christ.  By  this  sacrament,  those  who  are  baptized  to  God  the 
Father,  and  are  consecrated  to  his  Son  by  the  Holy  Spirit  as 
a  peculiar  treasure,  may  have  communion  with  both  of  them, 
and  serve  God  all  the  days  of  their  life. 

n.  The  author  of  the  institution  is  God  the  Father,  in  his 
Son,  the  mediator  of  the  I^ew  Testament,  by  the  eternal  Spirit 
of  both.  The  first  administrator  of  it  was  John  ;  but  Christ 
was  the  confirmer,  both  by  receiving  it  from  John,  and  by 
afterwards  administering  it  through  his  disciples. 

HI.  But  as  baptism  is  two-fold  with  respect  to  the  sign  and 
the  thing  signified — one  being  of  water,  the  other  of  blood  and 
of  the  Spirit — the  first  external,  the  second  internal ;  so  the 
matter  and  form  ought  also  to  be  two-fold — the  external  and 
earthy  of  the  external  baptism,  the  internal  and  heavenly  of 
that  which  is  internal. 

ly.  The  matter  of  external  baptism  is  elementary  water, 
suitable,  according  to  nature,  to  purify  that  which  is  unclean. 
Hence,  it  is  also  suitable  for  the  service  of  God  [significan' 


160 


JAMES  AEMINIFS. 


dum\  to  typify  and  witness  the  blood  and  the  Spirit  of  Christ ; 
and  this  blood  and  the  Spirit  of  Christ  is  the  thing  signified  in 
outward  baptism,  and  the  matter  of  that  which  is  inward. 
But  the  application  both  of  the  blood  and  the  Spirit  of  Christ, 
and  the  effect  of  both,  are  the  thing  signified  by  the  applica- 
tion of  this  water,  and  the  effect  of  the  application. 

Y.  The  form  of  external  baptism  is  that  ordained  adminis- 
tration, according  to  the  institution  of  God,  which  consists  of 
these  two  things  :  (1.)  That  he  who  is  baptized,  be  sprinkled 
with  this  water.  (2.)  That  this  sprinkling  be  made  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  An- 
alogous to  this,  is  the  inward  sprinkling  and  communication 
both  of  the  blood  and  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  which  is  done  by 
Christ  alone,  and  which  may  be  called  "  the  internal  form  of 
inward  baptism." 

YI.  The  primary  end  of  baptism  is,  that  it  may  be  a  con- 
firmation and  sealing  of  the  communication  of  grace  in  Christ, 
according  to  the  new  covenant,  into  which  God  the  Father  has 
entered  with  us  in  and  on  account  of  Christ.  The  secondary 
end  is,  that  it  may  be  the  symbol  of  our  initiation  into  the 
visible  church,  and  an  express  mark  of  the  obligation  by  which 
we  have  been  bound  to  God  the  Father,  and  to  Christ  our 
Lord. 

YII.  The  object  of  this  baptism  is  not  real^  but  only  per- 
sonal ;  that  is,  all  the  covenanted  people  of  God,  whether  they 
be  adults  or  infants,  provided  the  infants  be  born  of  parents 
who  are  themselves  in  the  covenant,  or  if  one  of  their  parents 
be  among  the  covenanted  people  of  God,  both  because  ablu- 
tion in  the  blood  of  Christ  has  been  promised  to  them  ;  and 
because  by  the  Spirit  of  Christ  they  are  ingrafted  into  the 
body  of  Christ. 

YIII.  Because  this  baptism  is  an  initiatory  sacrament,  it 
must  be  frequently  repeated  ;  because  it  is  a  sacrament  of  the 
Kew  Testament,  it  must  not  be  changed,  but  will  continue  to 
the  end  of  the  world  ;  and  because  it  is  a  sign  confirming  the 
promise,  and  sealing  it,  it  is  unwisely  asserted  that,  through  it, 
grace  is  conferred ;  that  is,  by  some  other  act  of  conferring 
than  that  which  is  done  through  \_s%gnificationem\  typifying 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS.  161 

and  sealing :  For  grace  cannot  be  immediately  conferred  by 
water. 


DISPUTATION^  LXIY. 

ON  THE  lord's  SUPPER. 

I.  As  IN  the  preceding  disputation,  we  have  treated  on 
baptism,  the  sacrament  of  initiation,  it  follows  that  we  now 
discuss  the  Lord's  supper,  which  is  the  sacrament  of  con- 
firmation. 

II.  We  define  it  thus :  The  Lord's  supper  is  a  sacrament  of 
the  New  Testament  immediately  instituted  by  Christ  for  the 
use  of  the  church  to  the  end  of  time,  in  which,  by  the  legiti- 
mate external  distribution,  taking,  and  enjoyment  of  bread  and 
wine,  the  Lord's  death  is  announced,  and  the  inward  receiving 
and  enjoyment  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  signified  ; 
and  that  most  intimate  and  close  union  or  fellowship,  by  which 
we  are  joined  to  Christ  our  Head,  is  sealed  and  confirmed  on 
account  of  the  institution  of  Christ,  and  the  analogical  rela- 
tion of  the  sign  to  the  thing  signified.  But  by  this,  believers 
profess  their  gratitude  and  obligation  to  God,  communion 
among  themselves,  and  a  marked  difference  from  all  other 
persons. 

III.  "We  constitute  Christ  the  author  of  this  sacrament ;  for 
he  alone  is  constituted,  by  the  Father,  the  Lord  and  Head  of 
the  church,  possessing  the  right  of  instituting  sacraments,  and 
of  efficaciously  performing  this  very  thing  which  is  signified 
and  sealed  by  the  sacraments. 

lY.  The  matter  is,  bread  and  wine  ;  which,  with  regard  to 
their  essence^  are  not  changed,  but  remain  what  they  previ- 
ously were ;  neither  are  they,  with  regard  to  jplace^  joined 
together  with  the  body  or  blood,  so  that  the  body  is  either  m, 
under^  or  with  the  bread,  &c. ;  nor  in  the  use  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  can  the  bread  and  wine  be  separated,  that,  when  the 
bread  is  held  out  to  the  laity,  the  cup  be  not  denied  to 
them. 


162 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


Y.  We  lay  down  the  form  in  the  relation  and  the  most  strict 
union,  which  exist  between  the  signs  and  the  thing  signified, 
and  the  reference  of  both  to  those  believers  who  communicate, 
and  by  which  they  are  made  by  analogy  and  similitude  some- 
thing [tmum']  united.  From  this  conjunction  of  relation, 
arises  a  two-fold  use  of  signs  in  this  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
supper — the  first,  that  these  signs  are  representative — the 
second,  that,  while  representing,  they  seal  Christ  to  us  with 
his  benefits. 

YI.  The  end  is  two-fold  :  The  first  is,  that  our  faith  should 
be  more  and  more  strengthened  towards  the  promise  of  grace 
which  has  been  given  by  God,  and  concerning  the  truth  and 
certainty  of  our  being  ingrafted  into  Christ.  The  second  is, 
(1,)  that  believers  may,  by  the  remembrance  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  testify  their  gratitude  and  obligation  to  God  ;  (2,)  that 
they  may  cultivate  charity  among  themselves ;  and  (3,)  that 
by  this  mark  they  may  be  distinguished  from  unbelievers. 


DISPUTATION^  LXY. 

ON  THE  POPISH  MASS. 

I.  Omitting  the  various  significations  of  the  word  "  mass" 
which  may  be  adduced,  we  consider,  on  this  occasion,  that 
which  the  papists  declare  to  be  the  external  and  properly 
called  "  expiatory  sacrifice,"  in  which  the  sacrificers  offer 
Christ  to  his  Father  in  behalf  of  the  living  and  the  dead,  and 
which  they  afiirm  to  have  been  celebrated  and  instituted  by 
Christ  himself  when  he  celebrated  and  instituted  his  last 
supper. 

II.  First.  We  say,  this  sacrifice  is  falsely  ascribed  to  the 
institution  of  the  Lord's  supper ;  for  Christ  did  not  institute  a 
sacrifice,  but  a  sacrament,  which  is  apparent  from  the  institu- 
tion itself,  in  which  we  are  not  commanded  to  offer  any  thing 
to  God,  at  least  nothing  external.  Yet  we  grant,  that  in  the 
Lord's  supper,  as  in  all  acts,  is  commanded,  or  ought  to  exist, 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


163 


that  internal  sacrifice  by  which  believers  offer  to  God  prayers, 
praises  and  thanksgiving.  In  this  view,  the  Lord's  supper  is 
called  "  the  eucharist?'^ 

III.  Secondly.  To  this  sacrifice  are  opposed  the  nature, 
truth  and  excellence  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  For,  as  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  is  single,  expiatory,  perfect,  and  of  infinite 
value  ;  and  as  Christ  was  once  offered,  and  "  hath  by  that  one 
oblation  perfected  for  ever  them  who  were  once  sanctified,"  as 
the  Scriptures  testify,  undoubtedly  no  place  has  been  left  either 
for  any  other  sacrifice,  or  for  a  repetition  of  this  sacrifice  of 
Christ. 

lY.  Thiedlt.  Besides,  it  is  wrong  to  suppose  that  Christ 
can  be  or  ought  to  be  offered  by  men,  or  by  any  other  person 
than  by  himself;  for  he,  alone,  is  both  the  victim  and  the 
priest,  as  being  the  only  one  who  is  truly  "  holy,  harmless, 
undefiled,  and  separate  from  sinners." 

Y.  From  all  these  particulars  it  is  sufficiently  apparent, 
that  it  is  not  necessary,  nay,  that  it  is  impious,  for  any  expia- 
tory sacrifice  now  to  be  offered  by  men  for  the  living  and  the 
dead.  Besides,  it  is  a  piece  of  foolish  ignorance,  to  suppose 
either  that  the  dead  require  some  oblation  ;  or  that  they  can 
by  it  obtain  remission  of  sins,  who  have  not  obtained  pardon 
before  death. 

YI.  In  addition  to  these  three  enormous  errors  committed 
in  the  mass,  with  respect  to  the  sacrifice,  to  the  priest,  and  to 
those  for  whom  the  sacrifice  is  offered,  there  is  a  fourth,  which 
is  one  of  the  greatest  turpitude  of  all,  and  is  committed  in  con- 
junction with  idolatry — that  this  very  sacrifice  is  adored  by 
him  who  offers  it,  and  by  those  for  whom  it  is  offered,  and  is 
carried  about  in  solemn  pomp. 

COROLLAKT. 

In  these  words,  the  mass  is  an  expiatory,  representative 
and  commemorative  sacrifice,"  there  is  an  opposition  in  the 
apposition  and  a  manifest  contradiction,  : 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


DISPUTATIOiSr  LXYI. 

ON  THE  FIVE  FALSE  SACEAMENTS. 

I.  As  THEEE  things  are  necessarily  required  to  constitute 
the  essence  of  a  sacrament — that  is,  divine  institution,  an  out- 
ward and  visible  sign,  and  a  promise  of  the  invisible  grace 
which  belongs  to  eternal  salvation — it  follows  that  the  thing 
which  is  deficient  in  one  of  these  requisites,  or  in  which  one 
of  them  is  wanting,  cannot  come  under  the  denomination  of  a 
sacrament. 

II.  Therefore pojjish  conjirmation  is  not  a  sacrament,  though 
the  external  signing  of  the  cross  in  the  forehead  of  the  Chris- 
tian, and  the  unction  of  the  chrism,  are  employed ;  for  these 
signs  have  not  been  instituted  by  Christ ;  neither  have  they 
been  sanctified  [ad  signiJiGandum]  to  typify  or  to  seal  any 
thing  of  saving  grace ;  nor  is  promised  grace  annexed  to  the 
use  or  to  the  reception  of  these  signs. 

in.  Penitence^  indeed,  is  an  act  prescribed,  by  the  Lord,  to 
all  who  have  fallen  into  sin,  and  has  the  promise  of  remission 
of  sins.  But  because  there  does  not  exist  in  it,  through  the 
divine  command,  any  external  sign,  by  which  grace  is  intima- 
ted and  sealed,  it  cannot,  on  this  account,  receive  the  appella- 
tion of  "  a  sacrament."  For  the  act  of  a  priest,  absolving  a 
penitent,  belongs  to  the  announcement  of  the  gospel ;  as  does 
likewise  the  injunction  of  those  works  which  are  inaccurately 
styled  by  the  papists  satisfactory^  that  is,  fasting,  prayers, 
alms,  afiiicting  the  soul,  &c. 

lY.  That  is  called  extreme  unction^  by  the  papists,  which 
is  bestowed  on  none  except  on  those  who  are  in  their  last  mo- 
ments ;  but  it  has  then  not  the  least  power  or  virtue  ;  nor  was 
it  ever  instituted  by  Christ  to  signify  the  jDromise  of  spiritual 
grace.  It  cannot,  therefore,  obtain  the  appellation  of  "  a  sac- 
rament." 

Y.  Neither  can  the  order  or  institution,  confirmation  or  in- 
auguration of  any  person  to  the  official  discharge  of  some  ec- 
clesiastical duties,  come  under  the  denomination  of  a  sacra- 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


165 


ment — both  because  it  belongs  to  the  particular  and  public  vo- 
cation of  some  persons  in  the  church,  and  not  to  the  general 
vocation  of  all ;  and  because,  though  it  may  have  been  insti- 
tuted by  Christ,  yet,  whatever  external  signs  may  be  employ- 
ed in  it,  they  do  not  belong  to  the  sealing  of  that  grace  which 
makes  a  man  [gratmri]  agreeable  [to  God]  or  which  is  saving, 
but  only  to  that  which  is  freely  given,  as  they  say  by  way  of 
distinction. 

YI.  Though  matrimony  between  a  husband  and  wife  agree 
by  a  certain  similitude  with  the  spiritual  espousals  subsisting 
between  Christ  and  the  church;  yet  it  it  was  neither  instituted 
by  the  Lord  for  signifying  this,  nor  has  it  any  promise  of  spir- 
itual grace  annexed  to  it. 


DISPUTATION  LXYn. 

ON  THE  WORSHIP  OF  GOD  IN  GENERAL. 

I.  The  first  part  of  our  duty  to  God  and  Christ  was,  the 
true  [sensus]  meaning  concerning  God  and  Christ,  or  true 
faith  in  God  and  Christ ;  the  second  part  is,  the  right  worship 
to  be  rendered  to  both  of  them. 

II.  This  part  receives  various  appellations.  Among  the 
Hebrews,  it  is  called  nTl^3^  D^rTlb^i^  iTli^l^?  honor  or 
worship,  and  the  fear  of  God.  Among  the  Greek,  it  is  called 
Ev(fs(3sia^  piety  ;  (s>so(fsf3sia^  godliness,  or  a  worshiping  of  God ; 
Gpri(fxsia^  religion ;  Aarpsja,  service  rendered  to  God ;  A^^Xsia, 
religious  homage ;  Gspa'jrsia^  divine  worship ;  Tj^xti^  honor ; 
€>o/3o^,  fear ;  A/a-Tni  ©s^,  the  love  of  God.  Among  the  Ro- 
mans it  is  called,  pietas,  cultus  or  cultura  dei^  veneratio^  ho- 
nos,  ohservantia. 

III.  It  may  be  generally  defined  to  be  an  observance  which 
must  be  yielded  to  God  and  Christ  from  a  true  faith,  a  good 
conscience,  and  from  charity  unfeigned,  according  to  the  will 
of  God  which  has  been  manifested  and  made  known  to  us,  to 


166 


JAMES  ABMINIUS. 


the  gloiy  of  botli  of  tliem,  to  the  salvation  of  the  worshiper, 
and  the  edification  of  others. 

lY.  We  express  the  genus  by  the  word  "  observance,"  be- 
cause it  contains  tlie  express  intention  of  our  mind  and  of  our 
will  to  God  and  to  his  will,  which  inte^ition  partly  inspires 
life  into  this  portion  of  our  duty  towards  God. 

Y.  The  object  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  whole  of  religion, 
and  of  the  first  part  of  it,  which  is  faith ;  and  this  object  is 
God  and  Christ,  in  which  the  same  formal  reasons  come  under 
consideration,  as  those  which  we  explained  when  treating  gen- 
erally on  religion. 

YI.  In  the  efficient  or  the  worshiper,  whom  we  declare  to 
be  a  christian  man,  we  require  true  faith  in  God  and  Christ,  a 
good  conscience,  as  having  been  sanctified  and  purified  through 
faith  by  the  blood  and  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  a  sincere  charity ; 
for,  without  these,  no  worship  which  is  rendered  to  God  can 
be  grateful  and  acceptable  to  him. 

YII.  The  matter  is,  those  particular  acts  in  which  the  wor- 
ship of  God  consists ;  but  the  very  will  and  command  of  God  [in- 
format]  gives  form  to  it ;  for  it  is  not  the  will  of  God  to  be 
worshiped  at  the  option  of  a  creature,  but  according  to  the 
pleasure  and  prescript  of  his  own  will. 

YIII.  The  principal  end  is,  the  glory  of  God  and  Christ. 
The  less  principal  is  the  salvation  of  the  worshiper,  and  the 
edification  of  others,  both  that  they  may  be  won  over  to 
Christ,  and  that,  having  been  brought  to  Christ,  they  may  the 
more  increase  and  grow  in  devotedness. 

IX.  The  form  is  the  observance  itself,  which  is  framed  from 
the  suitable  agreement  of  all  these  things  to  the  dignity,  ex- 
cellence and  merits  of  the  object  that  is  to  be  worshiped — from 
such  a  disposition  of  the  worshiper  according  to  such  prescript, 
and  from  the  intention  of  this  end.  If  one  of  these  be  wanting 
the  observance  is  vitiated,  and  is,  therefore,  displeasing  to  God. 

X.  Yet  the  worship  which  is  prescribed  by  God  must  not, 
on  this  account,  be  omitted,  though  the  man,  to  whom  it  is 
prescribed,  cannot  yet  perform  it,  from  such  a  mind,  (§  lY  & 
YI,)  to  this  end. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


167 


DISPUTATIOiT  LXYIII. 

ON  THE  PEECEPTS  OF  DIVINE  WORSHIP  IN  GENERAL. 

I.  To  THOSE  who  are  about  to  treat  on  the  worship  of  God, 
the  most  commodious  waj  and  method  seems  to  be  this — to 
follow  the  order  of  thelk)mmands  of  God  in  which  this  wor- 
ship is  prescribed,  and  to  consider  all  and  each  of  them.  For 
thev  instruct  and  inform  the  worshiper,  and  thej  prescribe  the 
matter,  form  and  end  of  the  worship. 

II.  In  the  precepts  which  prescribe  the  worehip  of  God, 
three  things  come  generally  under  consideration  :  (1.)  Their 
foundation,  on  which  rest  the  right  and  authority  of  him  who 
commands,  and  the  equity  of  his  command.  (2.)  The  com- 
mand itself.  (3.)  The  sanction,  through  promises  and  threat- 
enings.  The  first  of  these  may  be  called  the  preface  to  the 
command  the  third,  "  the  appendix  to  it and  the  second 
is  the  very  essence  of  the  precept. 

III.  The  foundation  or  preface,  containing  the  authority  of 
Him  who  commands,  and,  through  this,  the  equity  of  the  pre- 
cept, is  the  common  foundation  of  all  religion,  and,  on  this 
account,  also,  it  is  the  foundation  of  faith  ;  for  instance,  "  I 
am  the  Lord  thy  God,"  &c.  "  I,  the  God  omnipotent  or  all- 
sufficient,  will  be  thy  very  great  reward."  "  I  am  thy  God, 
and  the  God  of  thy  seed."  From  these  expressions,  not  only 
may  this  conclusion  be  drawn — "  Therefore  shalt  thou  love 
the  Lord  thy  God,"  "  Therefore  walk  before  me,  and  be  thou 
perfect" — but  likewise  the  following  :  "  Therefore  believe  thou 
in  me."  But  we  must  not  treat  on  this  subject  on  this  occa- 
sion, as  it  has  been  discussed  in  the  preceding  pages. 

lY.  I  say  that  the  other  two  are,  the  precept,  and  the  sanc- 
tion or  appendix  of  the  precept.  For  we  must  suppose  that 
there  are  two  parts  of  a  precept,  the  first  of  which  requires 
the  performance  or  the  omission  of  an  act,  and  the  second 
demands  punishment.  But  we  must  consider  that  the  latter 
part,  which  is  called  "  the  appendix,"  serves  for  this  purpose, 
that,  in  the  former,  God  enjoys  the  thing  which  he  desired, 


168 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


dispensing  blessings  if  he  obtain  bis  desire,  and  inflicting  pun- 
ishments if  he  does  not  obtain  it. 

Y.  "With  regard  to  the  precepts,  before  we  come  to  each  of 
them,  we  must  first  look  generally  at  that  which  comes  under 
consideration  in  every  precept. 

YI.  In  the  first  place,  the  object  of  every  precept  is  two- 
fold, the  ouQ  formal^  the  other  material  /  or  the  first  formally 
required,  the  second  materially,.  oAhese,  the  former  is  uni- 
form in  all  circumstances  and  in  every  precept,  but  the  lat- 
ter is  diflerent  or  distinguishable. 

YII.  The  formal  object,  or  that  which  is  formally  required, 
is  pure  obedience  itself  without  respect  of  the  particular  thing 
or  act  in  which,  or  about  which,  obedience  must  be  performed. 
And  we  may  be  allowed  to  call  such  obedience  "  blind,"  with 
this  exception,  that  it  is  preceded  solely  by  the  knowledge  by 
which  a  man  knows  that  this  very  thing  had  been  prescribed 
by  God. 

YIII.  The  material  object,  or  that  which  is  materially  re- 
quired, is  the  special  or  particular  act  itself,  in  the  perform- 
ance or  omission  of  which  obedience  lies. 

IX.  From  the  formal  object,  it  is  deduced  that  the  act  in 
which  it  is  the  will  of  God  that  obedience  be  yielded  to  him 
by  its  performance,  is  of  such  a  nature  that  there  is  something 
in  man  which  is  abhorrent  from  its  performance  ;  and  that  the 
act,  the  omission  of  which  is  commanded  by  God,  is  of  such 
a  nature  that  there  is  something  in  man  which  is  inclined  to 
perform  it.  If  it  were  otherwise,  neither  the  performance  of 
the  former,  nor  the  omission  of  the  latter,  could  be  called 
"  obedience." 

X.  From  these  premises,  it  further  follows  that  the  perform- 
ance and  the  omission  of  this  act  proceed  from  a  cause  which 
overcomes  and  restrains  the  nature  of  man,  that  is  inclined 
towards  the  forbidden  act,  and  is  abhorrent  from  that  which 
is  prescribed. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


m 


DISPUTATIOE"  LXIX. 

ON  OBEDIENCE,  THE  FORMAL  OBJECT  OF  ALL  THE  DIVINH 
PRECEPTS. 

I.  The  obedience  which,  is  the  formal  object  of  all  the  di- 
vine precepts,  and  which  is  prescribed  in  all  of  them,  is  prop- 
erly and  adequately  prescribed  to  the  will  conducting  itself 
according  to  the  mode  of  liberty ;  that  is,  as  it  is  free,  that 
[moderetur]  it  may  regulate  the  will  conducting  itself  accord- 
ing to  the  mode  of  nature,  that  is,  that  it  may  regulate  the 
inclination  according  to  the  prescribed  obedience. 

n.  This  liberty  is  either  that  of  contradiction  or  exercise, 
or  that  of  contrariety  or  specification.  According  to  the  lib- 
erty of  exercise,  the  will  regulates  the  inclination,  that  it  may 
perform  some  act  rather  than  abstain  from  it,  or  the  contrary. 
According  to  the  liberty  of  specification,  the  will  regulates 
the  inclination,  that,  by  such  an  act,  it  may  tend  towards  this 
rather  than  towards  that  object. 

III.  From  this  formal  object  of  all  precepts,  and  its  relation 
thus  considered,  arises  the  first  distribution  and  that  a  formal 
one,  of  all  the  precepts,  into  those  which  command,  and  those 
which  forbid  ;  that  is,  those  in  which  the  commission  or  the 
omission  [of  an  act]  is  prescribed. 

lY.  A  precept  which  forbids  is  so  binding,  as  not  to  allow 
a  man  to  commit  what  is  forbidden.  For  we  must  not  perpe- 
trate wickednesss  that  good  may  come  ;  yet  this  is  the  only 
reason  why  we  might  occasionally  be  allowed  to  perform  what 
has  been-  forbidden. 

Y.  A  precept  which  commands  is  not  equally  rigidly  bind- 
ing, so  as  to  require  \cixwc[ue  vel  moinento]  in  every  single  mo- 
ment of  time  the  performance  of  what  is  commanded ;  for 
this  cannot  be  done,  though  the  period  when  man  will  or  will 
not  perform  it,  is  not  left  to  his  option  ;  but  performance  of  it 
must  be  administered  according  to  the  occasioos  and  exigen- 
cies which  offer.  Thus  it  was  not  lawful  for  Daniel  to  abstain 
for  three  days  from  calling  upon  his  God. 

12  VOL.  n. 


170 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


YI.  When  a  precept  which  forbids,  and  one  which  com- 
mands, are  directly  contrary — whether  it  be  according  to  the 
act^  "  Thou  shalt  love  God,  and  not  hate  him,"  "  Thou  shalt 
hate  the  world  and  not  love  it or,  whether  it  be  according 
to  the  object^  "  Thou  shalt  love  God,  and  not  love  the  world 
"  Thou  shalt  hate  the  world,  but  shalt  not  hate  God  then 
the  transgression  of  the  law  which  forbids,  is  more  grievous 
than  that  which  commands,  because  it  recedes  further  from 
obLdience,  and  because  the  commission  of  an  evil  which  has 
been  forbidden  includes  in  it  the  omission  of  a  good  which  has 
been  commanded. 


DISPUTATION^  LXX. 

ON  OBEDIENCE  TO  THE  COMMANDS  OF  GOD  IN  GENERAL. 

I.  Because  the  yielding  of  obedience  is  the  duty  of  an  in- 
ferior, therefore,  for  the  performance  of  it,  humility  is  requi- 
site. This,  generally  considered,  is  a  quality  by  which  any  one 
\natus  est\  becomes  ready  to  submit  himself  to  another,  to  un- 
dertake his  commands  and  to  execute  them  ;  and,  in  this  in- 
stance, to  submit  himself  to  God. 

II.  Obedience  has  respect  partly  to  an  internal  act,  and 
partly  to  one  that  is  external.  The  performance  of  both  these 
is  required  for  entire,  trae,  and  sincere  obedience.  For  God 
is  a  Spirit,  and  the  inspector  of  hearts,  who  demands  the  obe- 
dience of  the  whole  man,  both  of  the  inward  and  the  outward 
man — obedience  from  the  affections  of  the  heart  and  from  the 
members  of  the  body.  The  external  act  without  the  internal 
is  hypocrisy  ;  the  internal,  without  the  external,  is  incom- 
plete, unless  man  be  hindered  from  the  performance  of  the  ex- 
ternal act  without  his  own  [  prcesente']  immediate  fault. 

III.  With  this,  nearly  coincides  the  expression  of  the  scho- 
lastic divines^ — "to  perform  a  command  either  according  to 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


in 


the  substance  of  the  act  only,  or  also  according  to  the  required 
quality  and  mode,"  in  which  sense,  likewise,  Luther  seems  to 
have  uttered  that  expression — "Adverbs  save  and  damn." 

lY.  The  grace  and  special  concurrence  of  God  are  required 
for  the  performance  of  entire,  true,  and  sincere  obedience, 
even  for  that  of  the  inner  man,  of  the  affections  of  the  heart, 
and  of  a  lawful  mode.  But  we  allow  it  to  be  made  a  subject 
of  discussion,  w^hether  revelation,  and  that  assistance  of  God 
which  is  called  "  general,"  and  which  is  opposed  to  this  spe- 
cial aid,  and  is  distinguished  from  it,  be  sufficient  only  to  per- 
form the  external  act  of  the  body  and  the  substance  of  the 
act. 

Y.  Though  that  special  grace  which  moves,  excites,  impels 
and  urges  to  obey,  physically  moves  the  understanding  and 
[affectum']  the  inclination  of  man,  so  that  he  cannot  be  other- 
wise than  affected  [sensu]  with  the  perception  of  it,  yet  it  does 
not  effect  or  elicit  the  consent  except  morally,  that  is,  by  the 
mode  of  suasion,  and  by  the  intervention  of  the  free  volition 
of  man,  which  free  volition  not  only  excludes  coaction,  but 
likewise  all  antecedent  necessity  and  determination. 

YI.  But  that  special  concurrence  or  assistance  of  grace, 
which  is  also  called  "  co-operating  and  accompanying  grace," 
differs  neither  in  kind  nor  efficacy  from  that  exciting  and  mo- 
ving grace  which  is  called  preventing  and  operating^  but  it  is 
the  same  grace  continued.  It  is  styled  "  co-operating"  or 
"  concomitant,"  only  on  account  of  the  concurrence  of  the  hu- 
man will  which  operating  and  preventing  grace  has  elicited 
from  the  will  of  man.  This  concurrence  is  not  denied  to  him 
to  whom  exciting  grace  is  applied,  unless  the  man  offers  re- 
sistance to  the  grace  exciting. 

YII.  From  these  premises,  w^e  conclude  that  a  regenerated 
man  is  capable  of  performing  more  good  than  he  actu- 
ally performs,  and  can  omit  more  evil  than  he  omits  ;  and, 
therefore,  that  neither  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  received  by 
St.  Augustine,  nor  in  that  in  which  some  of  our  divines  un- 
derstand it,  is  efficacious  grace  necessary  for  the  performance 
of  obedience — a  circumstance  which  is  highly  agreeable  with 
the  doctrine  of  St.  Augustine. 


172 


JAMES  ARMESnUS. 


COEOLLAET. 

Coaction  only  circumscribes  the  liberty  of  an  agent,  it  does 
not  destroy  or  take  it  away ;  and  such  circumscription  is  not 
made,  except  through  the  medium  or  intervention  of  the  nat- 
ural inclination ;  the  natural  inclination,  therefore,  is  more 
opposed  to  liberty  than  coaction  is. 


DISPUTATION  LXXI. 

ON  THE  MATERIAL  OBJECT  OF  THE  PRECEPTS  OF  THE  LAW  IN 

GENERAL. 

I.  As  MERE  obedience,  considered  in  the  abstract,  is  the 
formal  object  of  all  the  precepts  of  the  divine  law,  so  the  acts 
in  which  the  obedience  that  must  be  performed  is  prescribed, 
are  the  material  objects  of  the  same  precepts. 

II.  For  this  reason,  these  acts  will  at  length  be  said  to  be 
conformable  to  law,  annd  performed  according  to  law,  when 
obedience  \infoTrriaveTit\  has  given  form  to  them ;  that  is, 
when  they  have  been  performed  from  obedience,  or  through 
the  intention  and  desire  of  obeying.  This  desire  to  obey  is 
necessarily  preceded  by  a  certain  knowledge  that  those  acts 
have  been  prescribed  by  God,  according  to  this  expression  of 
the  apostle  :  "  Whatsoever  is  not  of  faith,  is  sin."  > 

III.  Hence,  it  is  apparent  that  a  good  intention  does  not 
suffice  to  justify  an  act,  unless  it  be  preceded  by  a  command 
of  God  and  a  knowledge  of  such  command  ;  though,  without 
a  good  intention,  no  act,  even  when  commanded  by  God,  can 
of  itself  be  pleasing  to  him.  But  it  is  our  w^isli  that,  under 
the  term  "  actions,"  omission  is  also  understood  to  be  compre- 
hended. 

lY.  A  good  work,  therefore,  universally  requires  these  con- 
ditions :  (1.)  That  it  be  prescribed  by  God.  (2.)  That  man 
certainly  knows  it  to  have  been  commanded  by  God.  (3.) 
That  it  be  performed  with  the  intention  and  desire  of  obeying 


PRIVATE  DISPTJTAUONS. 


1Y3 


God,  wliich  cannot  be  done  without  faith  in  Grod.  To  these 
ought  to  be  added  a  special  condition,  which  belongs  to 
Cln-ist  and  to  his  gospel — that  it  be  done  through  faith  in 
Christ,  because  no  work  is  agreeable  to  God  after  the  com- 
mission of  sin  in  a  state  of  grace,  except  in  Christ,  and 
through  faith  in  him. 

But  the  acts  which  are  prescribed  in  the  law,  are.  either  of 
themselves  and  in  their  own  nature  indifferent ;  or  they  have 
in  them  something  why  they  are  pleasing  or  displeasing  to 
God — why  they  are  prescribed  by  him  or  forbidden.  The 
law,  which  prescribes  the  former  of  these,  [the  indifferent 
acts,]  is  called  "positive,"  "symbolical,"  and  "ceremonial." 
That  which  prescribes  the  latter  is  styled  "  the  moral  law"  and 
"  the  decalogue  ;"  it  is  also  called  "  the  law  of  nature."  On 
these  last,  we  shall  afterwards  treat  at  greater  length. 

YI.  The  material  acts,  in  which  obedience  is  prescribed  to 
be  performed  by  the  moral  law,  are  either  general,  and  belong- 
ing to  the  observance  of  the  whole  law  and  of  all  and  each  of 
its  precepts  ;  or  they  are  special,  and  peculiarly  prescribed  in 
each  of  the  precepts  of  the  decalogue. 

YII.  The  general  acts  are  the  love,  honor  and  fear  of  God, 
and  trust  in  him.  The  special  acts  will  be  treated  in  the  par- 
ticular explanation  of  each  of  the  precepts. 


DISPUTATIOE"  LXXIL 

ON  THE  LOVE,  PEAK,  TKUST,  AND  HONOR  WHICH  AEE  DUE  FKOM 
MAN  TO  GOD. 

I.  These  general  acts  may  be  considered  either  in  the  first 
act  or  in  the  second.  In  the  first,  they  come  under  the  de- 
nomination of  affections  ;  in  the  second,  they  retain  to  them- 
selves the  appropriate  name  of  acts.  But  in  consequence  of 
the  close  union  and  agreement  of  nature  between  an  affection 
and  a  second  act,  love,  fear,  trust  and  honor,  receive  the  same 
denomination  of  "an  affection,"  and  "  an  act." 


174: 


JAMES  ARMTCmiS. 


II.  The  love  of  God  is  a  dutiful  act  of  man,  bj  which  he 
knowingly  and  willingly  prefers,  before  all  other  things,  the 
union  of  himself  with  God  and  obedience  to  the  divine  law, 
to  which  is  subjoined  a  hatred  of  separation  and  of  disobedi- 
ence. 

III.  The  fear  of  God  is  a  dutiful  act  of  man,  by  which  he 
knowingly  and  willingly  dreads  before  all '  things  and  avoids 
the  displeasing  of  God,  (which  is  placed  in  the  transgression 
of  his  commands,)  his  wrath  and  reprehension  and  any  [sin- 
ister] inauspicious  estimation  of  him  lest  he  be  separated  from 
God. 

TV.  Trust  in  God  is  a  dutiful  act  of  man,  by  which  he  know- 
ingly and  willingly  rej^oses  on  God  alone,  assuredly  hoping 
for  and  expecting  from  him  all  things  which  are  salutary  or 
saving  to  himself ;  in  which  we  also  comprehend  the  removal 
of  evils. 

Y.  The  honor  of  God  is  a  dutiful  act  of  man,  by  which  he 
knowingly  and  willingly  repays  to  God  the  reward  due  for 
his  excellent  virtues  and  acts. 

YI.  The  primary  object  of  all  these  acts,  as  they  are  pre- 
scribed by  law  and  are  man's  duty,  is  God  himself ;  because, 
for  whatever  other  things  these  acts  are  to  be  performed,  they 
must  be  performed  on  account  of  God  and  through  his  com- 
mand, otherwise  no  one  can  truly  call  them  ''''goodP 

YII.  The  formal  reason  of  the  object,  that  is,  why  these 
acts  may  and  ought  to  be  performed  to  God,  is,  the  wisdom, 
goodness,  justice,  and  power  of  God,  and  the  acts  performed 
by  him  according  to  and  through  them.  But  we  permit  this 
to  be  made  the  subject  of  a  pious  discussion.  Which  of  these, 
in  requiring  simple  acts,  obtain  the  precedence,  and  which  of 
them  follow  ? 

YIII.  The  immediate  cause  of  these  acts  is  man,  according 
to  his  understanding  and  inclination,  and  the  freedom  of  his 
will,  not  as  man  is,  \animalis\  natural,  but  as  he  is  spiritual, 
and  formed  again  after  the  life  of  God. 

IX.  The  principal  cause  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  infuses  into 
man,  by  the  act  of  regeneration,  the  affections  of  love,  fear, 
trust,  and  honor;  by  exciting  grace,  excites,  moves  and  incites 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS.  1T5 

him  to  second  acts,  and  by  co-operating  grace,  concurs  with 
man  himself  to  produce  such  second  acts. 

X.  The  form  of  these  acts  is  that  thej  be  done  through 
faith,  and  according  to  the  law  of  God.  Their  end  is,  that 
they  be  performed  to  the  salvation  of  the  workers  themselves, 
to  the  glory  of  God,  and  to  the  benefit  and  confirmation  of 
others. 


DISPUTATIOlSr  LXXin. 

ON  PARTICULAR  ACTS  OF  OBEDIENCE,  OR  THOSE  WHICH  ARE  PRE- 
SCRIBED IN  EACH  PRECEPT,  OR  CONCERNING  THE  DECALOGUE 
IN  GENERAL. 

I.  The  special  acts  of  obedience  are  prescribed  in  the  deca- 
logue, and  in  each  of  the  commandments.  The  decalogue, 
therefore,  itself,  must  be  considered  by  us  in  order. 

II.  A  convenient  distribution  of  the  decalogue  is  that  into  a 
preface  and  precepts.  The  preface  is  contained  in  these  words : 
"  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  who  have  brought  thee  up  from  the 
land  of  Egypt,  out  of  the  house  of  bondage."  For  we  are  of 
opinion  that  this  preface  belongs  to  the  entire  decalogue,  rath- 
er than  to  the  first  commandment ;  though  we  do  not  consider 
it  advisable  to  contend  about  a  matter  so  small  and  unimpor- 
tant. 

III.  The  preface  contains  a  general  argument  of  suasion, 
why  the  children  of  Israel  ought  to  yield  obedience  to  Jeho- 
vah— and  this  two-fold — the  first  drawn  from  the  right  of  con- 
federation or  covenant — the  second,  from  a  particular  and 
signal  benefit  recently  confeiTed  on  him.  The  former  of  these 
is  contained  in  the  words,  "the  Lord  thy  God the  latter, 
in  the  expression,  "  who  have  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,"  of  which  benefit  a  high  commendation  is  given  in  the 
description  which  is  added — that  Egypt  was  to  the  Israelites 
"  the  house  of  bondage  ;"  that  by  amplifying  the  misery  of 
that  servitude,  they  might  be  able  to  call  to  mind  those  things 
which  had  happened  to  them. 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


TV.  Though  this  argument,  "  thj  God,"  may  likewise  have 
respect  to  creation,  and  may  comprise  that  benefit,  yet  it  is 
more  probable  that  it  has  a  special  reference  to  the  concluding 
of  a  covenant  with  this  people. 

Y.  From  this  preface,  may  conveniently  be  deduced  those 
general  acts  about  which  we  have  treated  in  the  preceding  dis- 
putation— the  love,  fear,  trust,  and  honor  of  God  ;  for,  as  Je- 
hovah is  their  God,  who  delivered  them  out  of  Egypt,  there- 
fore, most  justly,  as  well  as  profitably,  must  he  be  loved,  feared 
and  honored,  and  trust  must  be  re230sed  in  him. 

YI.  But  some  things  generally  must  be  observed  lor  the 
correct  performance  of  all  the  precepts  together.    Such  are, 

YII.  The  law  of  God  requires  the  entire  obedience  of  the 
mouth,  heart  and  work,  that  is,  inward  and  outward  obedience 
— for  God  is  the  God  of  the  whole  man,  of  the  soul  and  body, 
and  looks  principally  upon  the  heart. 

YIII.  The  explanation  of  the  j^recepts  of  the  decalogue 
must  be  sought  from  Moses  and  the  prophets,  from  Christ  and 
his  apostles  ;  and  it  may  be  procured  in  sufficient  abundance, 
so  that  nothing  necessary  can  be  imagined,  which  may  not  be 
drawn  from  the  writings  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament. 

IX.  The  meaning  of  each  precept  must  be  taken  from  t?ie 
end  on  account  of  which  it  was  given  ;  and  all  those  things 
must  be  considered  as  included  in  it,  without  which  the  pre- 
cept cannot  be  performed.  Therefore,  one  and  the  same  work 
may  be  referred  to  different  precepts,  so  far  as  it  has  respect 
to  difierent  ends. 

X.  In  affirmation,  its  opposite  negative  seems  to  be  com- 
prised ;  and,  in  a  negative,  the  affirmation  which  is  opposed 
to  it ;  because  God  not  only  requires  a  refraining  from  evil, 

ut  likewise  a  performance  of  good,  though  a  reason  may  be 
given  why  God  declared  some  things  negatively,  and  others 
affirmatively. 

XI.  Homogeneous  and  cognate  acts  are  commanded  or  are 
forbidden  in  the  same  precept ;  and  a  genus  comprehends  its 
species  ;  and  a  species  comprises,  in  the  same  command,  other 
species  allied  to  it,  unless  a  just  law  exists  why  it  must  be  oth- 
erwise determined. 


PRIVATE  DISPTJTATIOJTS. 


m 


XII.  An  effect  in  its  cause,  or  a  cause  in  its  effect,  (if  the 
conversion  be  necessary  and  according  to  nature,)  is  not  com- 
manded and  prohibited  through  accident. 

XIII.  When  of  those  things  which  have  a  relation  to  each 
other,  one  is  prescribed  or  forbidden,  the  other  is  also  com- 
manded or  forbidden,  because  they  mutually  lay  themselves 
down  and  remove  themselves. 

XIY.  If  it  happen  that  the  observance  of  two  precepts  can- 
not be  paid  at  the  same  time  to  both  of  them,  regard  must  be 
had  to  that  which  is  of  the  greater  moment,  and  for  the  per- 
formance of  which  more  and  juster  causes  exist. 


DISPUTATIOISr  LXXIY. 

ON  THE  FIEST  COMMAND  IN  THE  DECALOGUE. 

I.  The  ten  precepts  of  the  decalogue  are  conveniently  dis- 
tributed into  those  of  the  first  and  those  of  the  second  table. 
To  the  first  table  are  attributed  those  precepts  which  immedi- 
ately prescribe  our  duty  towards  God  himself ;  of  this  kind, 
there  are  four.  The  second  table  claims  those  precepts  which 
contain  the  duties  of  men  towards  their  fellow-men;  and  to  it 
are  attributed  the  last  six. 

II.  This  is  the  relation  which  subsists  between  the  com- 
mands of  each  table — that,  from  love  to  God  and  in  reference 
to  him,,  we  manifest  love,  and  the  offices  of  love  towards  our 
neighbor ;  and  if  it  should  happen  that  we  must  of  necessity 
relinquish  either  our  duty  to  God  or  our  neighbor,  God  should 
be  preferred  to  our  neighbor.  Let  this  relation,  however,  be 
understood  as  concerning  those  precepts  only  which  are  not  of 
the  ceremonial  worship  ;  otherwise,  [respecting  ceremonies] 
this  declaration  holds  good  :  "  I  will  have  mercy,  and  not  sac- 
rifice." 

III.  The  first  commandment  is,  "  Thou  shalt  have  no  other 
god  before  my  face,"  or  "  against  my  face." 

lY.  It  is  very  certain  that,  in  this  negative  precept,  the 


178 


JAMES  ARMmilJS. 


subjoined  affirmative  one  is  included  or  presupposed  as  some- 
thing preceding  and  prerequisite  :  "  Thou  shalt  have  me,  who 
am  Jehovah,  for  thy  God."  Tliis  is  likewise  immediately  con- 
sequent upon  the  preface,  "  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God  there- 
fore, "  Let  me  be  the  Lord  thy  God  ;"  or,  which  is  the  same, 
"  Therefore,  have  thou  me,  the  Lord,  for  thy  God." 

Y.  But  "  to  have  the  Lord  for  our  God,  is  the  part  both  of 
the  understanding  and  of  [afectus]  the  inclination  or  the 
will ;  and,  lastly,  of  an  effect  proceeding  from  both  or  from 
each  of  them. 

YL  "  Another  god"  is  whatever  the  human  mind  invents, 
to  which  it  attributes  the  divinity  that  is  suitable  and  appro- 
priate to  the  true  God  alone — whether  such  divinity  be  essence 
and  life,  or  properties,  works,  or  glory. 

YIL  Or  whether  the  thing  to  which  man  attributes  divin- 
ity be  something  existing  or  created,  or  whether  it  be  some- 
thing non-existent  and  merely  imaginary  and  a  figment  of  the 
brain,  it  is  [perinde]  equally  "  another  god ;"  for  the  entire 
divinity  of  that  other  god  lies  radically,  essentially  and  virtu- 
ally in  human  ascription,  and  by  no  means  in  that  to 
which  such  divinity  is  ascribed.  Hence  is  the  origin  of 
this  phrase,  in  Scripture,  "  To  go  a  whoring  after  their  own 
heart." 

YIIL  But  this  "other  God"  may  be  conceived  under  a 
three-fold  difference,  according  to  the  Scriptures.  For  those 
who  have  him,  have  (1,)  either  themselves  been  the  first  in- 
ventors of  him,  (2,)  have  received  him  from  their  parents,  or 
(3,)  from  other  nations,  when  neither  they  nor  their  fathers 
knew  him ;  and  this  last  is  done  either  by  force,  by  persuasion, 
or  by  the  free  and  spontaneous  choice  of  the  will. 

IX.  For  this  reason,  that  "other  god"  is  truly  called  "  an 
idol ;"  and  the  act  by  which  he  is  accounted  another  god, 
is  idolatry  ;  whether  this  be  committed  in  the  mind,  by  esti- 
mation, acknowledgment,  and  belief,  or  by  the  affections,  love, 
fear,  trust  and  hope,  or  by  some  external  effect  of  honor,  wor- 
ship, adoration  and  invocation. 

X.  The  enormity  of  this  sin  is  apparent  from  the  fact  of  its 
being  called  "  a  defection  from  God,"  "  a  forsaking  of  the  liv- 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


179 


ing  fountain,"  and  "a  digging  of  broken  cisterns  that  hold  no 
water,"  "a  perfidious  desertion  of  holy  matrimony,"  and  "a 
violation  of  the  connubial  compact."  ISTay,  the  gentiles  are 
said  to  sacrifice  to  devils  whatsoever  they  suppose  that  they 
ofier  to  God,  in  this  ignorance  of  God  and  alienation  from  the 
life  of  God. 

XI.  The  cause  why  men  are  said  to  do  service  unto  devils, 
although  they  have  themselves  other  thoughts,  is  this :  because 
Satan  is  the  fountain  head,  and  origin  of  all  idolatry  ;  and  is 
the  author,  persuader,  impeller,  approver  and  defender  of  all 
the  worship  which  is  expended  on  another  God.  Hence,  like- 
wise, it  is  the  highest  degree  of  idolatry  when  any  one  accounts 
divine  or  ascribes  divinity  to  Satan  as  Satan,  displaying  him- 
self as  Satan  and  vaunting  himself  for  God. 

XII.  But  though  the  gentiles  worshiped  angels  or  devils, 
not  as  the  supreme  God,  but  as  minor  deities  and  his  minis- 
ters, by  whose  intervention  they  might  have  communication 
with  the  supreme  God  ;  yet  the  worship  which  they  paid  to 
them  was  idolatry,  because  this  worship  was  due  to  no  one 
except  to  the  true  God.  But  it  does  not  belong  to  the  defini- 
tion of  idolatry,  that  any  one  should  pay  to  another,  as  to 
God,  that  worship  which  is  due  to  the  true  God  alone ;  for  it 
is  sufficient  if  he  account  him  as  God,  by  ascribing  divine 
worship  to  him,  though,  in  his  mind,  he  may  account  him  not 
to  be  the  supreme  God.  It  is  no  palliation  of  the  crime,  but 
an  aggravation,  if  anyone  knowingly  performs  divine  worship 
to  him  whom  he  knows  not  to  be  God. 

XIII.  And  since  Christ  must  be  honored  as  the  Father  is, 
because  he  has  been  constituted  by  his  Father  King-  and  Lord, 
and  has  received  all  judgment,  since  every  knee  must  bow  to 
him,  and  since  he  is  to  be  invoked  as  Mediator  and  the  Head 
of  his  church,  so  that  the  church  can  pay  this  honor  to  no  one 
except  him,  without  incurring  the  crime  of  idolatry ;  there- 
fore, the  papists,  who  adore  Mary,  the  angels,  or  holy  men, 
and  who  invoke  them  as  the  donors  and  administrators  of  gifts, 
or  as  intercessors  through  their  own  merits,  are  guilty  of  the 
crime  of  idolatry. 


180 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


XIY.  Besides,  wlien  they  adore  the  bread  in  the  Lord's 
Bupper,  and  receive  and  account  the  pope  for  that  person- 
age whom  he  boasts  himself  to  be,  they  commit  the  sin  of 
idolatry. 


DISPUTATION^  LXXY. 

ON  THE  SECOND  CO^IMAND  IN  THE  DECALOGUE. 

I.  The  second  precept  consists  of  a  command  and  its  sanc- 
tion, from  a  description  of  God,  who  is  prompt  and  powerful 
to  punish  the  transgressor,  and  who  is  greatly  inclined  to  bless 
him  that  is  obedient.  In  this,  are  consequently  included  a 
threat  of  punishment  and  a  promise  of  reward. 

II.  This  command  is  negative.  A  deed  which  is  dipleas- 
ing  to  God  is  forbidden  in  these  words :  "  Thou  shalt  not  make 
unto  thee  any  graven  image,  or  any  likeness  of  any  thing  that 
is  in  the  earth  beneath,  or  that  is  in  the  water  under  the  earth ; 
thou  shalt  not  bow  down  thyself  to  them,  nor  serve  them." 

III.  The  sum  of  the  precept  is,  that  no  one  should  adore  or 
offer  divine  worship  to  any  sculptured,  molten  or  painted  im- 
age, or  one  made  in  any  other  way,  whether  it  has  for  its 
archetype  a  thing  really  existing  or  something  fictitious,  God 
or  a  creature,  or  whether  it  resemble  its  archetype  according  to 
some  real  conformity,  or  only  by  institution  and  opinion,  or, 
which  is  the  same  thing,  that  he  do  not  in  or  to  any  image 
adore  or  worship  that  which  he  coi^siders  in  the  place  of  a 
deity  and  worships  as  such,  whether  this  be  truly  or  falsely. 

lY.  As,  from  a  comparison  of  this  precept,  with  other  pas- 
sages of  Scripture  in  which  God  commands  certain  images  to 
be  made,  it  appears  that  the  mere  formation  of  every  kind  of 
image  whatsoever  is  not  forbidden,  provided  that  they  be  not 
prostituted  to  worship  ;  so,  from  a  comparison  of  this  same 
precept  with  others  which  are  analogous  to  it  or  collateral,  it 
is  evident  that  no  image  ought  to  be  made  to  represent  God, 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


181 


because  this  very  act  is  nothing  else  but  a  changing  of  the 
glory  of  the  incorruptable  God  into  the  image  or  likeness  of  a 
corruptible  thing.  For  whatever  can  be  fashioned  or  framed 
is  visible,  therefore  corruptible.  We  are  not  afraid  of  making 
this  general  affirmation  under  the  sanction  of  the  Scriptures, 
though  with  them  and  from  them  we  know,  that  now,  accord- 
ing to  the  body,  Christ  is  incorruptible. 

Y.  A  double  distinction  is  here  employed  by  the  papists, 
of  an  archetype  and  its  image  ;  and  also  of  an  image  itself  as 
it  is  formed  of  such  materials^  and  as  it  is  an  image^  that  is, 
calculated  and  fitted  to  represent  the  archetype.  From  these, 
they  further  deduce  the  distinction  of  the  intention  in  worship- 
ing ;  by  which  the  worshiper  looks  upon  either  the  archetype 
alone,  not  its  image ;  or,  if  he  even  looks  on  the  image,  he 
does  not  behold  it  as  it  is  made  of  such  materials,  neither  on 
it  principally^  but  in  reference  to  its  archetype.  We  do  not 
attempt  to  deny  that  the  mind  of  man  can  frame  a  distinction 
of  this  kind. 

YI.  But  when  those  who  fall  down  before  an  image  attempt, 
by  such  a  distinction,  to  excuse  themselves  from  the  trans- 
gression of  this  precept,  they  accuse  God  liiraself  of  a  false- 
hood, and  deride  his  command.  (1.)  They  charge  him  with 
falsehood  ;  because,  when  God  declares  that  he  who  falls  down 
before  an  image,  says  to  the  wood^nd  to  the  stone,  "Thou  art' 
my  Father !"  they  assert,  that  the  prostrated  person  does  not 
say  this  to  the  wood  and  the  stone,  but  to  their  archetype,  that 
is,  to  God.  (2.)  They  mock  God  and  his  command  ;  because 
by  this  distinction  it  comes  to  pass,  that  no  man  at  any  time, 
though  paying  adoration  to  any  kind  of  images,  can  be  brought 
in  guilty  of  having  violated  this  precept,  unless,  according  to 
his  own  opinion,  he  has  judged  that  wood  really  to  be  God, 
and  therefore  that  he  has  himself  truly  and  in  reality  formed 
a  god,  which  cannot  possibly  enter  into  the  conception  of  one 
who  uses  his  reason. 

YII.  But  they  partly  annihilate  their  own  excuse  which 
rests  on  this  distinction,  when  they  say  that  the  same  honor 
and  worship  (whether  it  be  that  of  latria^  of  dulia,  or  of  hy- 
perdulia,)  must  be  given  to  an  image  as  to  its  archetype. 


182 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


Neitlier  does  this  prolong  its  existence  hy  such  distinction, 
when  they  represent  God  himself  hy  an  image,  because  that  is 
simply  forbidden  to  be  done. 

YIII.  We  assert,  therefore,  that,  according  to  the  judgment 
of  God,  and  express  passages  of  Scripture,  the  papists  are  cor- 
rectly charged  with  [effigiant]  giving  a  portraiture  of  the  es- 
sence of  God,  when  they  represent  him  in  the  form  of  an  old 
man,  graced  with  an  ample  grey  beard,  and  seated  on  a  throne 
— though  in  express  words  they  say,  that  they  know  God  has 
not  a  body,  and  though  they  protest  that  they  had  fashioned 
this  form,  not  for  the  purpose  of  representing  his  essence,  but 
that  they  had  instituted  this  similitude  to  represent  the  ap- 
pearance which  he  occasionally  made  to  his  prophets,  and  to 
signify  his  presence.  For  the  ]3rotestation  is  contrary  to  facts  ; 
since  facts  are,  by  nature,  not  what  we  feign  them  to  be,  but 
what  God,  the  legislator,  declares  them  to  be.  But  he  says 
those  facts  are,  that  he  has  been  assimilated,  that  a  [supposed] 
likeness  of  himself  has  been  formed,  and  that  he  has  been 
[falsely]  set  up  in  a  gold  or  silver  graven  image. 

IX.  We  assert  that  all  those  images  of  which  we  have  spo- 
ken— both  thos*  of  God,  placed  only  for  representation,  and 
those  of  other  things  (whether  true  or  fictitious,)  exposed  for 
adoration — are  correctly  called  "idols,"  not  only  according  to 
the  etymology  of  the  word,  but  likewise  according  to  the  usage 
of  the  Scriptures,  and  that  the  distinction  which  is  employed 
by  the  papists  between  idols  and  resemblances  or  images  has 
been  produced  from  the  dark  cave  of  horrid  idolatry. 

X.  In  the  same  precept  in  which  it  is  forbidden  to  fashion 
or  make  any  images  for  divine  worship,  it  is  likewise  com- 
manded to  remove  others,  if  they  have  been  previously  made 
and  exposed  for  worship,  these  two  cautions  being  always  ob- 
served, (1.)  That  it  be  done,  when  preceded  by  a  suitable  and 
sufficient  teaching.  (2.)  That  it  be  the  work  of  those  who 
are  in  possession  of  the  supreme  authority  in  the  common- 
wealth and  the  church. 

XI.  Though  the  honor  exhibited  to  such  images,  or  to  the 
deity  through  such  images,  be  reproachful  to  the  true  God 
himself;  yet  he,  also,  who  pours  contumely  on  the  images 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


183 


which  he  considers  to  be  correctly  formed,  and  lawfully  pro- 
posed for  worship,  pours  contumely  on  the  deity  himself, 
whom  he  presumes  to  worship,  and  declares  himself  to  be  an 
atheist. 

XII.  The  affirmation  seems  here  to  be  strictly  and  directly 
opposed  to  the  whole  negative  precept,  that  we  may  worship 
God,  because  he  is  a  Spirit,  with  a  pure  cogitation  of  mind 
and  abstracted  from  every  imagination. 

XIII.  The  sanction  of  the  precept,  wh'ch  includes  the 
threatening,  is  this  :  "  For  I,  the  Lord  thy  God,  am  a  jealous 
God,  visiting  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children, 
unto  the  third  and  fourth  generation  of  them  that  hate  me 
that  is,  unless  you  obey  this,  my  precept,  you  shall  feel  that  I 
am  jealous  of  mine  honor,  and  that  I  will  not,  with  impunity, 
suffer  it  t^  be  given  to  another,  or  my  glory  to  be  communica- 
ted to  graven  images. 

XIY.  The  other  part  of  the  sanction  contains  a  promise  in 
these  words  :  "  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,  shewing  mercy  unto 
thousands  of  them  that  love  me  and  keep  my  commandments 
[That  is,  if  you  obey  this  my  precept,  you  shall  feel  that  I  will 
display  mercy  towards  you,  and  towards  your  children  to  the 
thousandth  generation,  provided  that  they  also  love  me.] 

XY.  But  mention  is  made  of  posterity,  that  men  may  be 
thus  the  more  incited  to  obedience,  since  their  future  compli- 
ance with  the  precept  will  prove  beneficial,  not  only  to  them- 
selves, but  to  their  posterity,  or  their  futm^e  transgression  will 
be  injurious  to  them  and  their  offspring. 

XYI.  From  a  comparison  of  the  preceding  command  with 
this,  it  appears  that  there  is  a  two-fold  idolatry — one,  by  which 
a  false  and  fictitious  deity  is  worshiped  ;  another,  by  which  a 
true  or  false  deity  is  worshiped  in  an  image,  by  an  image,  or 
at  an  image.  Yet  this  very  image  is  sometimes  called  "  a 
false  and  another  god,"  which  the  Lord  God  also  seems  to 
intimate  in  this  place,  when  he  endeavors  to  deter  men  from  a 
violation  of  this  precept  by  an  argument  drawn  from  his 
jealousy.  * 


i84 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


COROLLAKY. 

"Without  any  exaggeration,  the  idolatry  of  the  papists  may 
be  placed  on  an  equality  with  that  of  the  Jews  and  gentiles. 
If  it  be  urged  as  an  exception,  that  they  have  neither  made 
their  children  pass  through  the  fire,  nor  have  offered  living 
men  in  sacrifice — we  reply.  The  horrid  tyranny  which  the 
papists  have  exercised  in  the  murder  of  so  many  thousand 
martyrs,  with  the  design  of  confirming  the  idolatry  that 
flourishes  among  tliem,  may  be  equitably  compared  to  making 
their  children  pass  through  the  fire,  and  the  oblation  of  living 
men  in  sacrifice,  if  not  according  to  tJie  appearance  of  the 
deed,  at  least  according- to  the  grievous  nature  of  the  crime. 


DISPUTATIOIS'  LXYI. 

ON  THE  THIRD  PRECEPT  OF  THE  DECALOGUE. 

I.  This  precept,  as  well  as  its  predecessor,  consists  of  a 
command,  and  of  its  sanction  through  the  threatening  of  a 
punishment.  The  precept  is  a  negative  one,  and  prohibits  a 
deed  which  is  displeasing  to  God,  in  these  words :  "  Thou 
shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain." 

II.  The  reason,  and  end  of  the  precept  is  this :  Because 
God  is  entirely  holy,  and  because  his  name  is  full  of  majesty, 
we  must  use  it  in  a  holy  and  reverend  manner,  and  must,  by 
no  means,  account  it  common  or  contaminate  it. 

ni.  "  The  name  of  God"  is  here  received  in  its  most  general 
notion,  for  every  word  which,  according  to  the  purpose  of 
God,  is  used  to  signify  God  and  divine  things. 

lY.  "  To  assume"  or  "  to  take  the  name  of  God,"  is, 
properly,  to  take  that  word  into  our  mouth  and  pronounce  it 
with  our  tongue.  If,  under  this  phrase,  any  one,  by  a  synec- 
dgclie,  is  desirous,  likewise,  of  comprehending  the  deeds,  in 
which  God  and  divine  things  are  less  religiously  treated,  he 
has  our  full  permission ;  and,  we  think,  he  does  not  depart 


'  mi- . 

PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS.  1B5 

from  the  sense  of  tlie  precept.  But  we  still  continue  in  the 
explanation  of  the  proper  acceptation. 

y.  The  particle,  "  in  vain^^''  is  variously  received — for  that 
which  is  done  rashly  and  without  just  cause — for  wliatisdone 
in  vain  and  with  no  useful  end — for  what  is  done  with  men- 
dacity, dissimulation,  falsely,  inadvertently,  &c.  Hence,  this 
prohibition  likewise  diffuses  itself  extensively  in  every  direc- 
tion. 

YI.  But,  perhaps  with  some  propriety,  every  "  taking  of 
the  name  of  the  Lord  in  vain"  may  be  reduced  to  two  princi- 
pal heads  or  kinds  :  The  first  genus  comprehends  the  use  of 
the  name  of  God  when  no  mention  of  it,  whatever,  should  be 
made  ;  that  is,  in  a  word  or  deed,  in  which  it  has  been  the 
will  of  God  that  the  mention  of  his  name  shall  not  intervene, 
either  because  the  word  or  deed  is  not  lawful,  or  because  it  is 
of  minor  moment. 

YIL  But  the  second  genus  comprises  the  incorrect  use  of 
the  name  of  God  ;  that  is,  when  it  is  not  truly  used  in  any  of 
our  duties  in  which  it  may  be  lawfully  used,  or  in  which  it 
ought  also  to  be  dutifully  used  according  to  the  divine 
direction. 

YIII.  The  duties  of  this  class  are,  the  adoration  and  invo- 
cation of  God,  the  narration  and  preaching  of  his  word  or  of 
divine  things,  oaths,  &c.  In  these,  the  name  of  God  is  taken 
in  vain,  in  three  ways:  (1.)  Hypocritically,  when  it  is  not 
used  sincerely  from  the  whole  heart.  (2.)  With  a  doubting 
conscience,  when  it  is  used  with  an  uncertain  belief  that  it  is 
lawful  to  be  used  in  that  dut3^  (3.)  Against  conscience,  as 
when  it  is  employed  to  bear  testimony  to  a  falsehood. 

IX.  The  threatening  is  expressed  in  these  words  :  "  For  the 
Lord  will  not  leave  him  unpunished  that  taketh  his  name  in 
vain."  By  this  he  endeavors  to  persuade  men,  that  no  one 
should  dare  io  use  his  name;  of  which  persuasion  there  is  so 
much  the  greater  necessity,  as  the  heinousness  of  this  offence 
is  not  sufficiently  considered  among  men. 

13  VOL  II. 


186 


JAMES  AEMINIUB. 


DispuTATioisr  Lxxyn. 

ON  THE  FOURTH  COMMAND  IN  THE  DECALOGUE. 

I.  This  precept  contains  two  parts,  a  command  and  a  reason 
for  it.  But  the  command  is  first  proposed  in  few  words ;  it  is 
afterwards  more  amply  explained.  The  proposition  is  in  these 
words :  "  Eemember  the  sabbath  day,  to  keep  it  holy."  The 
explanation  is  thus  expressed  :  "  Six  days  shalt  thou  labor, 
and  do  all  thy  work,"  &c.  But  the  reason  is  comprehended 
in  the  following  words :  "  For  in  six  days  the  Lord  made 
heaven  and  earth,  the  sea,"  &c. 

II.  In  the  proposition  of  the  precept,  three  things  are  worthy 
of  observation  :  (1.)  The  act  prescribed,  which  is  sanctifica- 
tion.  (2.)  An  anxious  and  solicitous  care  about  not  omitting 
this  act,  which  is  expressed  in  the  words,  "remember,"  and 
"  do  not  forget."  (3.)  The  object,  which  is  called  "  the  Sab- 
bath," or  "  the  seventh  day  ;"  that  is,  the  seventh  in  the  order 
of  the  days  in  which  the  creation  was  commenced  and  per- 
fected. It  is  also  called  "the  Sabbath,"  from  the  circumstance 
of  God  having  rested  at  that  period,  and  man  was  required  to 
repose. 

IIL  The  explanation  contains  two  things  :  (1.)  A.  conces- 
sion or  grant,  that  men  may  spend  six  days  in  labors  belong- 
ing to  the  natural  life  and  its  sustenance ;  this  concession, 
contains  the  equity  of  the  command.  (2.)  A  command  about 
resting  from  those  works  on  the  seventh  day,  with  an  enu- 
meration of  the  persons  whose  duty  it  is  to  rest :  "  'Not  only 
thou,  but  also  thy  son,  thy  man  servant,  thy  maid  servant,  thy 
cattle,  and  thy  stranger  shall  rest ;"  that  is,  thou  shalt  cause 
as  many  persons  to  rest  as  are  under  thy  power. 

lY.  The  reason  contains,  in  itself,  two  arguments  :  The 
FIRST  is  the  example  of  God  himself,  who  rested  from  his 
works  on  the  seventh  day.  The  second  is  the  benediction  and 
sanctification  of  God,  by  which  it  was  his  pleasure  that  the 
seventh  should  be  separated  from  the  rest  of  the  days,  and  de- 
voted to  himself  and  to  his  worship. 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS.  187 

Y.  "  To  sanctify  the  seventh  day,"  is  to  separate  it  from' 
common  uses,  and  from  such  as  belong  to  the  natural  life,  and 
to  consecrate  it  to  God,  and  to  acts  which  belong  to  God,  to 
things  divine,  and  to  the  spiritual  life.  This  sanctification 
consists  of  various  acts. 

YI.  We  think  that  it  may  be  made  a  most  useful  point  of 
consideration,  how  far  must  abstinence  from  those  works  which 
belong  to  the  natural  life  be  extended  ?  And  though  we  pre- 
scribe nothing  absolutely,  yet  we  should  wish  that  [licentiam'] 
the  liberty  of  performing  such  labors  should  be  restricted  as 
much  as  possible,  and  conliDed  to  exceedingly  few  necessary 
things.  For  we  have  no  doubt  that  the  sabbath  is  in  various 
ways  violated  among  Christians,  by  not  abstaining  from  such 
things  as  are  lawful  to  be  done  on  other  days. 

YII.  We  think  that  the  acts  which  belong  to  the  sanctifica- 
tion of  the  sabbath  may  be  included  in  two  classes  :  (1.) 
Some  per  se  and  primarily  belong  to  the  worship  of  God,  and 
are  in  themselves  grateful  and  acceptable  to  God.  (2.)  Others 
are  subordinate  to  those  acts  which  are  to  be  performed,  and 
they  answer  tbe  purpose,  that  those  acts  may,  in  the  best 
possible  manner,  be  performed  to  God  by  men  ;  such  are  those 
which  belong  to  the  instruction  of  believers  in  their  duty. 

YIII.  But  this  kind  of  sanctification  ought  not  only  to  be 
private  and  domestic,  but  also  public  and  ecclesiastical.  For 
it  is  the  will  of  God,  not  only  that  he  should  be  acknowledged, 
worshiped,  invoked  and  praised  by  each  individual  in  private, 
but  likewise  by  all  united  together  in  the  great  church  ;  that 
he  may,  by  this  means,  be  owned  to  be  the  God  and  Lord  not 
only  of  each  individual,  but  likewise  [totius  universitatis]  of 
the  whole  of  his  universal  family. 

IX.  But  because  the  neglect  of  God  and  of  things  divine 
easily  creeps  upon  man,  who  is  too  closely  intent  on  this 
natural  life,  it  was,  therefore,  necessary  that  men's  memories 
should  be  refreshed  by  this  word  "  Remember,"  &c. 

X.  But  now,  with  regard  to  the  seventh  day,  which  is  com- 
manded to  be  sanctified.    In  it,  this  is  moral  and  perpetual  

tnat  the  seventh  day,  that  is,  one  out  of  the  seven,  be  devoted 
to  divine  worship,  and  that  it  be  unlawful  for  any  man,  at 


188 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


any  time,  after  Laving  expended  six  days  in  the  labors  of  the 
natural  life,  to  continue  the  seventh  day  in  all  the  same  labors, 
or  in  tlie  same  manner. 

XI.  But  with  regard  to  that  day  among  the  seven  which 
followed  the  six  days  in  which  God  completed  the  creation, 
its  sanctification  is  not  of  perj^etual  institution  and  necessity  ; 
but  it  might  be  changed  into  another  day,  and  in  its  own  time 
it  was  lawful  for  it  to  be  changed,  that  is,  into  the  day  which 
is  called  "  the  Lordh  day  /"  because  the  new  creation  was 
then  perfected  in  Christ  our  head,  by  his  resurrection  from  the 
dead  ;  and  it  was  equitable  and  right  that  the  new  people 
should  enter  on  a  new  [salhatism]  method  of  kee].)ing  the 
Sabbath. 

XII.  That  reason  which  was  taken  from  the  example  of 
God  who  rested  on  the  seventh  day,  (that  is,  when  the  creation 
was  completed,)  endured  to  the  time  of  the  new  creation;  and, 
therefore,  when  it  ceased,  or  at  least  when  a  second  reason  was 
added  to  it  from  the  new  creation,  it  was  no  subject  of  won- 
der that  the  apostles  changed  it  into  the  following  day,  on 
which  the  resurrection  of  Christ  occurred.  For  when  Christ 
no  longer  walks  in  the  flesh,  and  is  not  known  after  the  flesh, 
all  things  become  new\ 

Xni.  But  the  benediction  and  the  sanctification  of  God  are 
understood  to  be  transferred  from  the  Sabbath  to  the  Lord's 
day  ;  because  all  the  sanctification  wln'ch  pertains  to  the  new 
earth,  is  perfected  in  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  truly  the  Holy  of 
holies,  and  in  whom  all  things  are  sanctified  for  ever. 

XIV.  Because  the  reason,  by  wliich  God  afterwards  per- 
Buaded  the  people  to  observe  the  Sabbath,  was  for  a  sign  be- 
tween him  and  his  people  that  God  would  engage  in  the  act 
of  sanctifying  them  ;  it  may  likewise  be  accommodated  to  the 
times  of  the  New  Testament,  and  may  persuade  men  to  the 
observance/ of  the  [new]  sabbath. 

XV.  If  py  one  supposes  that  the  Lord's  day  is  by  no  means 
to  be  distinguished  from  the  rest  of  the  days  [of  the  week]  ; 

or  if,  for  the  sake  of  declaring  evangelical  liberty,  this  person  • 


PKIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


189 


has  changed  it  into  another  day,  either  into  Monday  or  Tues- 
day ;  we  think  he  ought  at  least  to  be  considered  a  schismatic 
in  the  church  of  God. 


DISPUTATIOIT  LXXYIII. 

ON  THE  FIFTH  COMMAND  IN  THE  DECALOGUE. 

I.  This  precept  is  the  first  of  the  second  table.  It  contains 
the  precept  itself,  and  the  promise  attached  to  it.  The  end  of 
the  precept  is,  that  a  certain  order  should  exist  among  men, 
according  to  which  some  are  superiors  and  others  inferiors, 
and  which  consists  in  the  mutual  performance  of  the  duties 
of  commanding  and  obeying  that  are  necessary  for  the  defence 
of  society. 

II.  The  precept  prescribes  an  act,  and  adds  an  object  to 
which  that  act  must  be  performed.  The  act  is  contained  in 
the  word  "  honor  the  object  in  these  words  :  "  thy  father 
and  thy  mother."  From  this,  it  appears,  according  to  the 
nature  of  relations,  that  this  law  is  prescribed  to  all  those  who 
are  relatively  opposed  to  father  and  mother  [as  are  sons  and 
daughters]. 

III.  The  word  "  honor"  is  not  appropriately  employed  to 
signify  eminence  ;  for  honor  is  the  reward  of  excellence,  and 
its  performance  is  a  sign  of  recognition  ;  and  this  w^ord  com- 
prehends, either  in  the  wide  compass  of  its  signification,  all 
the  duties  which  are  due  from  an  inferior  to  a  superior ;  or,  as 
an  end,  it  comprehends  all  things  necessary  to  the  rendering 
of  such  honor. 

lY.  Three  things  principally  are  contained  in  this  word : 
(1.)  That  reverence  be  shown  to  the  persons  of  our  parents. 
(2.)  That  obedience  be  performed  to  their  commands.  (3.) 
That  gratitude  be  evinced,  in  conferring  on  them  all  things 
necessary  to  the  preservation  of  the  present  life,  with  respect 
to  the  dignity  of  their  persons  and  of  their  office. 

V.  1.  E-everence  consists  both  in  tlie  performance  of  those 


190 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


acts  which  contain,  [on  our  part]  a  confession  of  their  pre-em- 
inence and  of  our  submission  under  them,  and  in  the  endu- 
rance of  their  faults  and  manners,  in  a  connivance  at  them, 
in  a  modest  conceahiient  of  them,  and  in  kind  excuses  for 
them. 

YI.  2.  Obedience  lies  in  the  prompt  and  free  performance 
of  those  things  which  they  prescribe,  and  in  the  omis  ion  of 
those  w^hich  they  prohibit.  This  obedience  must  be  perform- 
ed not  only  "  for  wrath,"  or  the  fear  of  punishment,  but  also 
"  for  conscience'  sake,"  and  this,  not  so  much  that  we  may 
obey  them,  as  God  himself,  w^hose  vicegerents  they  are. 

YII.  3.  Gratitude,  which  contains  the  conferring  of  things 
necessary  for  them  to  the  uses  of  life  according  to  their  digni- 
ty, ought  to  extend  itself  not  only  to  the  time  when  they  dis- 
charge this  duty,  but  likewise  through  the  whole  life — though 
it  may  happen  that,  through  old  age  or  some  other  cause,  they 
are  rendered  unfit  to  discharge  the  parental  office. 

YIII.  The  duties  of  superiors  are  analagous  to  those  of  in- 
feriors— that  they  conduct  themselves  with  moderation,  [grav- 
itatem']  seriousness,  and  decorum,  in  the  whole  of  their  life, 
public  as  well  as  private — that  they  observe  justice  and  equity 
in  issuing  their  commands,  and  that,  in  requiring  gratitude^ 
they  do  not  transgress  the  bounds  of  moderation.  But  these 
points  will  be  more  particularly  discussed  in  the  disj^utation 
on  the  magistracy. 

IX.  The  object  is  enunciated  in  the  words  "  father,"  and 
"  mother,"  in  which,  likewise,  are  comprehended  all  those  who 
are  placed  above  us  in  human  society,  whether  it  be  political, 
ecclesiastical,  scholastic  or  domestic  society — whether  in  the 
time  of  peace  or  in  that  of  war — whether  such  persons  dis- 
charge the  duties  of  an  ordinary  or  an  extraordinary  office,  or 
whether  they  be  invested  with  this  power  either  [in  jperj^etu- 
urn\  constantly,  or  only  for  a  season,  however  short. 

X.  But  all  these  persons  in  authority  are,  in  this  command- 
ment, fitly,  and  not  without  just  cause,  expressed  under  the 
name  of  "  parents,"  which  is  an  endearing  and  delightful  ap- 
pellation, and  most  appropriate  both  to  signify  [affectvrn^  the 
feeling  which  it  is  right  for  superiors  to  indulge  towards  infe- 


PRIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


191 


riors,  and  most  efficaciously  to  effect  a  persuasion  in  inferiors 
of  the  equity  of  performing  their  duty  towards  their  superi- 
ors. It  may  be  added  that  the  first  association  among  men  is 
that  of  domestic  society,  and  from  this  follow  the  rest  by  the 
increase  of  mankind. 

XI.  Superiors  lose  no  degree  of  this  eminence  by  any  sin, 
or  by  any  [vitiosUate]  corruption  of  their  own  ;  therefore,  this 
duty  of  honor,  reverence,  obedience  and  gratitude  must  be 
performed  to  superiors,  e^en  when  they  are  evil,  and  abusing 
their  power  ;  provided  caution  be  used  that  [partes]  the  in- 
terest of  God  be  always  the  more  powerful  with  us,  and  lest, 
while  that  which  is  Caesar's  is  given  to  Cagsar,  that  which  be- 
longs to  God,  be  taken  from  him,  or  be  not  given. 

XII.  To  this,  must  necessarily  be  subjoined  another  three- 
fold caution — 1.  That  no  one  commit  an  error  in  judgment, 
by  which  he  persuades  himself  this  or  that  belongs  to  God, 
and  not  to  Csesar.  (2.)  That  he  discern  correctly  between  that 
which  he  is  commanded  to  do  or  to  tolerate  ;  and,  if  he  must 
do  it,  whether  or  not  it  be  an  act  about  a  thing  or  object  which 
is  subject  to  his  poww.  (3.)  That  under  the  name  of  liberty, 
no  one  arrogate  to  himself  the  right  of  a  superior,  of  not 
obeying  in  this  thing  or  that,  or  the  power  of  rising  against 
his  superior,  either  for  the  purpose  of  taking  away  his  life,  or 
only  his  rule  and  dominion. 

XIII.  The  promise  which  is  added  to  this  precept  is  con- 
tained in  the  following  words :  that  thy  days  maybe  long  upon 
the  land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  will  give  thee in  which 
are  promised,  (1,)  to  the  Jewish  believers  who  perform  this 
precept,  bngth  of  days  in  the  land  of  Canaan  ;  (2,)  and  also 
to  the  gentile  believers  who  perform  this  command,  the  dura- 
tion of  the  present  life ;  (3,)  typically,  to  such  persons  are 
promised  the  eternal  or  heavenly  life,  of  which  the  land  of 
Canaan  was  a  type. 


193 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


DISPUTATIO]^"  LXXIX. 

ON  THE  SIXTH  PEECEPT. 

I.  Order  in  human  society  being  appointed  by  the  fifth 
commandment,  through  the  mutual  duties  of  superiors  and 
inferiors  in  commanding  and  obeying,  God  now  manifests  his 
care  for  all  those  things  which,  in  order  to  pass  one's  life  in 
this  society,  are  necessary  for  the  life  of  each  person,  for  the 
propagation  of  the  species,  for  the  blessings  necessary  to  life, 
and  for  reputation,  at  the  end  of  which  God  adds  the  tenth 
commandment,  in  which  [cojicupiscentia]  th^coveting  of  cer- 
tain things  is  prohibited. 

II.  By  these  words,  "  thou  shalt  not  kill,"  the  sixth  precept 
provides  for  the  preservation  of  the  natural  life,  and  designs 
the  safety  of  men's  bodies  that  it  may  be  preserved  inviolate. 

III.  The  sum  of  the  precept  is  neither  in  reality  to  injure 
the  life  of  another  person,  and  to  endanger  his  safety,  nay  not 
even  our  own,  whether  we  use  fraud  or  violence,  nor  to  wish 
his  injury  by  our  will,  to  which  must  be  added  that  we  do  not 
intimate  this  kind  of  wish  by  any  external  token. 

lY.  From  this,  it  appears  that  the  accident  must  not  receive 
the  ajDpellation  of  "homicide,"  if,  as  the  Scripture  phrase  is, 
anyone  going  into  a  wood  with  his  neighbor  to  cut  down  timber, 
and  the  head  of  his  ax  slips  from  the  handle  and  strikes  his 
neighbor  so  that  he  dies,  nor,  if,  for  the  defence  of  his  own 
life,  any  one  be  compelled,  at  the  peril  of  his  life,  to  repel  the 
force  employed  against  him  by  another. 

Y.  But  in  this  precept,  we  are  commanded  to  endeavor  by 
all  legitimate  means  and  methods,  to  save  the  life  of  our 
neighbor,  as  well  as  our  own,  and  to  defend  them  from  all 
injury. 

YI.  But  the  cause  of  this  precept,  which  is  universal  and 
always,  and  in  ever}^  place,  valid,  is  the  following  :  because 
man  \vas  created  after  the  image  of  God,  which,  in  this  place, 
principally  denotes  immortality.  To  this,  may  be  added  si- 
militude of  nature,  and  because  all  of  us  derive  our  origin 


PEIVATE  DISPUTATIONS. 


193 


from  one  blood.  But  several  particular  causes  may  be  addu- 
ced, which  agree  with  the  spiritual  state  of  men,  such  as  be- 
cause they  have  been  redeemed  by  Christ  with  a  price — be- 
cause their  bodies  are  a  habitation  for  the  Holy  Spirit — ■ 
because  they  are  all  members  of  one  mystical  body  under  one 
head,  &c. 

YII.  But,  in  the  mean  time,  God  reserves  to  himself  the 
right  of  disposing  of  the  life  of  every  man  according  to  his 
own  pleasure.  Hence,  commands  have  been  issued  to  magis- 
trates concerning  killing  transgressors,  and  a  command  was 
delivered  to  Abraham  about  slaying  his  son. 

COEOLLAEY. 

The  perpetration  of  homicide  cannot  consist  with  a  good 
conscience,  unless  pardon  for  it  be  sought  and  obtained  by 
particular  repentance,  &c. 


DISSEETATION 

OK 

THE  TRUE  AITD  GENUINE  SENSE 

OF 

THE  SEYEOTH  CHAPTEE  OF  ST.  PAUL'S  EPISTLE 
TO  THE  EOMANS. 

BT  THAT  FAMOTTS  DIVINB 

THE  EEY.  JAMES  AEMmiUS,  D.  D. 

A  NATIVE  OF  OUDEWATEE,  IN  HOLLAND. 


DEDICATION. 


to  the  most  honoeable  and  noble  william  bardesius,  loed- 
lieutenant  of  waemenhuysp^n,  a  nobleman  who  is  oue  pat- 
eon,  and  who,  on  many  accounts,  is  to  be  honoeed  by  us, 
Most  Honoeable  and  Xoble  Sie  : 

That  expression  of  the  apostle  Paul,  by  which  he  designates 
the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  as  "  the  truth  which  is  according  to 
godliness,"  (Titus  i,  1,)  is  very  remarkable  and  worthy  of  per- 
petual consideration.  From  this  sentiment,  with  the  leave  of 
all  good  men,  we  may  collect  taat  this  "truth"  neither  consists 
in  naked  theory  and  inane  speculation,  nor  in  those  things 
which,  belonging  to  mere  abstract  knowledge,  only  play  about 
the  brain  of  man,  and  which  never  extend  to  the  reformation 
of  their  will  and  affections.  But  it  consists  in  those  things 
which  imbue  the  mind  with  a  sincere  fear  of  God,  and  with  a 
true  love  of  solid  piety,  and  which  render  men  "  zealous  of 
good  works."  Another  passage,  not  less  famous  and  remark- 
able, in  the  same  epistle  and  by  the  same  apostle,  tends  greatly 
to  confirm  and  illustrate  this  view  of  the  matter ;  it  is  thus 
expressed :  "  For  the  grace  of  God  that  bringeth  salvation 
hath  appeared  to  all  men,  teaching  us  that,  denying  ungodli- 
ness and  worldly  lusts,  we  should  live  soberly,  righteously  and 
godly  in  this  present  world."  (Titus  ii,  11,  12.)  Whosoever 
they  be,  therefore,  that  profess  themselves  the  heralds  of  this 
divine  "  truth,"  they  ought  to  give  additional  diligence  that, 
casting  aside  all  curious  and  thorny  questions,  and  those  idlo 
Bubtilities  which  derive  their  origin  from  human  vanity,  they 


198 


JAMES  AHMlimJS. 


commend  to  their  hearers  this  one  and  only  "godliness,"  and 
that  they  seriously  instruct  them  in  faith,  hope  and  charity. 
And,  in  return,  those  of  their  auditors  who  are  enamored  with 
this  "  truth,"  are  bound  strenuously  to  conform  themselves  to 
this  course  of  conduct — to  pass  by  and  to  slight  all  other  things 
which  may  come  across  their  path,  and  constantly  to  aim  at 
this  "godliness"  alone,  and  keep  their  eyes  intent  upon  it. 
For  both  clergy  and  laity  may  receive  this  as  a  principle,  that 
they  are  yet  rude  and  complete  strangers  in  true  theology, 
unless  they  have  learned  so  to  theologize,  that  theology 
may  bear  the  torch  before  them  to  that  piety  and  holiness 
which  they  sedulously  and  earnestly  pursue. 

If  this  admonition  ever  was  necessary,  it  is  undoubtedly  the 
more  necessary  at  this  time ;  because  we  see  impiety  over- 
flowing ill  every  direction,  like  a  sea  raging  and  agitated  by 
whirlwinds.  Yet,  amidst  all  this  storm,  such  are  the  stupor 
and  insensibility  of  men,  that  not  a  few  who  remain  exactly 
the  same  persons  as  they  formerly  were,  and  who,  indeed, 
have  not  changed  the  least  particle  of  the  manner  of  their  im- 
pure life,  still  imagine  themselves  to  be  in  the  class  of  prime 
christians,  and  promise  themselves  the  favor  of  the  supreme 
God,  the  possessing  of  heaven  and  of  life  eternal,  and  of  the 
company  of  Christ  and  of  the  blessed  angels,  with  such  great 
and  presumptuous  confidence,  and  with  such  security  of  mind, 
that  they  consider  themselves  to  be  atrociously  injured  by  those 
who,  judging  them  to  be  deceived  in  this  their  self-persuasion, 
desire  them  in  any  wise  to  entertain  doubts  about  it.  In  a  con- 
dition of  affairs  thus  deplorable,  no  endeavor  appears  to  be 
more  laudable,  than  to  institute  a  diligent  inquiry  into  the 
causes  of  such  a  pernicious  evil,  and,  by  employing  a  saving 
remedy,  to  arouse  erring  souls  from  this  diabolical  lethargy, 
and  induce  them  to  alter  their  lives,  under  the  felicitous  aus- 
pices of  the  gospel  and  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  to  devote  their  en- 
ergies to  a  solid  amendment  of  manners,  and  thus,  at  length, 
from  the  divine  word,  to  promise  themselves,  when  answering 
this  description,  grace  with  God  and  eternal  glory. 

The  causes  of  this  evil  are  various,  and  most  of  them  con- 
sist in  certain  erroneous  and  false  conceptions  which,  being 


DEDICATION". 


199 


impressed  on  their  minds,  some  men  carry  about  with  them, 
being  either  their  own  inventions,  or  furnished  to  them  from 
some  other  quarter ;  yet,  either  in  general  or  in  particular, 
either  directly  or  indirectly,  such  erroneous  conceptions  lay  a 
stumbling-block  and  an  impediment  before  the  true  and  seri- 
ous study  of  piety  and  the  pursuit  of  virtue.  We  will  not,  in 
this  place,  introduce  any  mention  of  the  impious  conceptions 
of  some  men  who  do  not  believe  either  that  there  is  a  life  eter- 
nal, or  that,  if  it  really  exists,  it  is  of  such  great  and  sublime 
excellence  as  it  is  described  to  be  in  the  Holy  Scriptures-— 
who  either  despair  of  the  mercy  of  God  towards  repentant  sin- 
ners, or  who  consider  it  to  be  impossible  to  enter  on  that  way 
of  piety  and  new  obedience  which  has  been  prescribed  by  the 
prince  of  our  salvation.  We  say  nothing  about  these  persons, 
*  because  they  not  only  relax  the  asseverations  and  the  promises  of 
God,  which  are  the  true  foundations  of  the  christian  religion, 
but  they  likewise  entirely  overturn  them,  and  thus,  with  one 
effort,  they  pluck  up,  by  the  roots,  all  piety,  and  all  desire  and 
love  of  it,  from  the  hearts  of  men. 

We  now  begin  to  make  some  observations  on  those  hypoth- 
eses, whether  secret  or  avowed,  which  are  injurious  to  piety, 
and  which  obtain  among  christians  themselves,  whether  they 
be  publicly  defended  or  otherwise.  Among  them,  the  first 
which  comes  under  enumeration,  is  the  dogma  of  uncondition- 
al predestination^  with  those  which  depend  on  it  by  a  neces- 
sary connection ;  and,  in  particular,  the  so  highly  extolled 
perseverance  of  the  saints^  in  a  confidence  in  which  such 
things  are  uttered  by  some  persons  as  we  dread  to  recite,  for 
they  are  utterly  unworthy  of  entering  into  the  ears  of  christians. 
It  is  no  small  impediment  which  these  dogmas  place  in  the 
way  of  piety.  When,  after  a  diligent  and  often-repeated  pe- 
rusal of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  after  long  meditations  and  ardent 
prayers  to  God,  with  fasting,  our  father,  of  blessed  memory, 
thought  that  he  had  made  a  sure  discovery  of  the  baneful  ten- 
dency of  these  dogmas,  and  had  refiected  upon  them  within 
his  own  breast,  and  that,  however  strenuously  they  might  be 
urged  by  certain  divines,  and  generally  instilled  into  the  minds 
of  students  by  scholastic  exercises,  yet  neither  the  ancient 


200 


JAMES  ARMENIUS. 


chiircli  nor  the  modern,  after  a  previous  lawful  examination  of 
them,  ever  received  them  or  allowed  them  to  pass  into  mat- 
ters that  had  obtained  mature  adjudication.  When  he  per- 
ceived these  things,  he  began  by  degrees,  to  propose  his  diffi- 
culties about  them,  and  his  objections  against  them,  for  the 
purpose  of  shewing  that  they  were  not  so  firmly  founded  in 
the  Scriptures  as  they  are  generally  supposed  to  be ;  and,  in 
process  of  time,  being  still  more  strongly  confirmed  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  truth,  especially  after  the  conference  which 
he  had  w^th  Doctor  Fkancis  Junius,  and  in  which  he  had 
Been  the  weakness  of  his  replies,  he  began  to  attack  those  dog- 
mas with  greater  boldness ;  yet  on  no  occasion  was  he  for- 
getful of  the  modesty  which  so  eminently  became  him.  But, 
of  the  arguments  with  which  he  attacked  those  dogmas,  this 
[on  the  seventh  chapter  of  St.  Paul's  epistle  to  the  Romans] 
in  wdiich  we  have  now  engaged,  was  not  the  last — that  is,  such 
was  the  [genius]  nature  of  these  doctrines  that  they  were  cal- 
culated to  relax  the  study  of  piety,  and  thus  to  extinguish  it. 
In  that  labor  he  also  occasionally  employed  subtilities,  and  such 
reasons  as  are  not  at  once  obvious  to  the  multitude  ;  but  they 
were  subtile  distinctions,  necessary  for  overturning  dogmas 
which,  in  his  judgment,  were  very  baneful.  And,  undoubt- 
edly, as  love  is  not  conquered  except  by  another  love,  so  that 
subtility,  which  is  the  inventor  and  establisher  of  falsehood, 
can  scarcely  be  conquei-ed  and  overturned  without  the  sub- 
tility which  is  the  assertor  of  the  truth  and  the  con  victor  of 
falsehood.  Therefore,  the  subtilities  which  he  employed  on 
that  occasion,  [his  conference  with  Junius,]  were  useful  and 
necessary — not  insignificant,  trifling,  and  invented  for  pleas- 
ure, ostentation  or  display.  But  with  regard  to  other 
things,  it  is  known  to  all  those  who  were  on  terms  of  familiar- 
ity with  him — especially  during  the  last  years  of  his  life,  when 
he  was  much  engaged  in  the  schools,  in  which  it  is  an  estab- 
lished custom  principally  to  pursue  subtilities — what  a  rigid 
enemy  he  was  of  all  subtilities  and  of  lofty  language  ;  and  even 
those  whom  he  had  among  his  students  that  differed  on  some 
other  points  from  him,  could  testify,  if  they  would  conscien- 
tiously relate  the  truth,  that  he  referred  all  things  to  use  and 


DEDICATION. 


201 


to  the  practice  of  a  christian  life  ;  and  thus  that  piety  and  the 
fear  of  the  divine  Majesty  uniformly  breathed  in  his  lectures, 
in  his  disputations,  (both  public  and  private,)  in  his  sermons, 
discoui-ses  and  writings.  But  it  is  not  necessary  for  us,  in  this 
place,  to  rehearse  the  method  by  which  he  proved  the  genius 
of  unconditional  predestination  and  its  annexed  dogmas  to  be 
adverse  to  godliness  ;  because  his  writings  on  this  subject  are 
partly  extant,  and  the  remainder,  under  the  divine  auspices, 
will  soon  be  published.  It  is  better  that  prudent  readers 
should  listen  to  him  uttering  his  own  words,  than  to  us  who 
are  but  stammerers  about  him.  The  water  is  sweeter  which 
we  taste  at  the  fountain,  than  that  which  we  drink  at  a  dis- 
tance from  the  spring. 

Yarious  are  the  other  hypotheses  which  operate  as  hin- 
drances to  piety,  and  the  whole  of  which  we  are  not  able  now 
to  mention ;  but  we  will  briefly  discuss  a  few  of  those  which 
occur,  that  we  may  not  produce  weariness  in  you,  most  noble 
sir,  by  our  prolixity. 

A  capital  error  which  first  oifers  itself,  and  which  closely 
adheres  to  the  inmost  core  and  fibres  of  nearly  all  mankind,  is 
that  by  which  they  silently  imagine  in  their  own  minds  that 
illimitable  mercy  exists  in  God  ;  and  from  this  they  opine  that 
they  will  not  be  rejected,  though  they  have  indulged  them- 
selves a  little  too  much  in  vicious  pursuits,  but  that,  on  the 
contrary,  they  will  continue  to  be  dear  to  God  and  beloved. 
This  error  is  in  reality  joined  with  notorious  incredulity,  and, 
in  a  great  measure  destroys  the  Christian  religion,  which  is 
founded  on  the  blood  of  Christ.  For,  in  this  way,  is  removed 
all  -necessity  for  a  pious  life,  and  a  manifest  contradiction  is 
given  to  the  declaration  of  the  apostle,  in  which  he  afiirms 
that  without  holiness  no  man  shall  see  God."  (Heb.  xii,  14.) 
Alas  for  the  insanity  of  men,  who  have  the  audacity  to  bless 
themselves  when  they  are  cursed  by  God  ! 

This  is  succeeded  by  the  false  hypothesis  of  others,  who, 
revolving  in  their  minds  [instituta]  the  designs,  the  morals, 
and  the  life  of  mortals,  and  reflecting  on  the  multitude,  among 
men  of  all  orders,  of  those  who  are  wandering  in  error,  con^ 
14  TOL.  n. 


202 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


elude  that  the  mercy  of  God  will  not  permit  eternally  to 
perish  so  many  and  such  infinite  myriads  of  rational  crea- 
tures, formed  after  the  divine  image.  The  consequence  is, 
that,  instead  of  performing  their  duty  according  to  the  tenor 
of  Christianity,  by  opposing  the  torrent. of  impiety,  they,  on 
the  contrary,  suffer  themselves  to  be  carried  away  by  the  im- 
pulse of  such  views,  and  associate  with  the  multitudes  of  those 
who  are  devious  in  error.  They  seem  to  forget  that  the  many 
walk  in  the  broad  way,  whose  end,  according  to  the  truth  of 
God,  will  be  "  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord." 
A  multitude  will  preserve  no  man  trom  perdition.  Unhappy 
and  most  miserable  solace,  to  have  many  companions  in  endu- 
ring everlasting  punishment ! 

Let  the  force  of  this  deception,  likewise,  be  considered,  that 
vices  are  dignified  with  the  names  of  virtues,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  virtues  receive  the  defiling  appellation  of  vices. 
The  effect  of  this  is,  that  men,  who  are  of  themselves,  prone  to 
vicious  indulgences,  pursue  them  with  the  greater  avidity  when 
they  are  concealed  under  the  mask  of  virtues,  and,  on  the  con- 
trary, are  terrified  at  virtues,  in  the  attainment  of  which  any 
diflficulty  is  involved,  as  though  they  were  clothed  in  the  mon- 
strous garb  of  the  most  horrid  vices.  Thus,  among  mankind, 
drunkenness  obtains  the  name  of  hilarity  ;  and  filthy  talking, 
that  of  cheerful  freedom  /  while  sobriety  in  food  and  drink, 
and  simplicity  in  dress,  are  opprobiously  styled  hypocrisy. 
This  is  really  to  "  call  good  evil^  and  evil  good^''  and  to  seek 
an  occasion,  by  which  a  man  may  cease  from  the  practice  of 
virtue,  and  devote  himself  to  vicious  courses,  not  only  without 
any  reluctance  of  conscience,  but  likewise  at  the  impulse  and 
instigation  of  his  [seared]  conscience.  Into  this  enumeration, 
must  come  that  shameful  and  false  reasoning  by  which  \male-.  \ 
sani]  unwise  men  infer,  from  those  passages  \  Scripture  in 
which  we  are  said  to  be  justijied  hy  faith  without  worhs^  that 
it  is  not,  therefore,  necessary  to  attend  to  good  works,  they 
being  of  such  a  nature  that  without  them  we  may  be  justified, 
and,  therefore,  saved.  They  never  advert  to  the  fact  that,  in 
other  passages,  it  is  recorded — True  faith,  that  is,  the  faith  by 


DEDICATIOJSr. 


203 


which  we  are  justified,  must  be  efficacious  through  charity ; 
and  that  faith,  without  works,  is  dead,  and  resembles  a  lifeless 
carcass,  ixi  , 

This  vain  idea  also,  in  no  trifling  degree,  consoles  the  men  - 
who  try  to  flatter  themselves  in  those  vices  to  which  they  have 
a  constitutional  propensity — that  they  are  not  given  up  to  all 
vices,  they  have  not  run  into  every  excess  of  wickedness,  but, 
though  addicted  to  certain  vices  peculiar  to  themselves,  they 
feel  an  abhorrence  for  all  others.  As  men  are  most  ingenious 
in  the  invention  of  excuses  for  themselves,  in  support  of  this 
incorrect  view  are  generally  cited  these  common  phrases :  'No 
man  lives  without  sin  ;"  Every  man  is  captivated  by  that 
which  he  finds  to  be  pleasing  to  himself."  Such  men,  there- 
fore, consider  themselves  to  be  true  Christians,  and  that,  on 
this  account,  it  will  be  eternally  well  with  them,  when,  as 
they  foolishly  persuade  themselves,  they  abstain  from  most 
evils,  and,  as  for  the  rest,  they  cherish  only  some  one  vice,  a 
single  Herodias  alone.  A  most  absurd  invention !  since  no 
one  is,  no  one  can  be,  addicted  to  all  vices  at  once  ;  because 
some  among  them  are  diametrically  opposed  to  others,  and 
are  mutual  expellers.  If  this  conceit  be  allowed,  no  mortal 
man  either  will  or  can  be  impious.  The  subjoined  passage  in 
the  epistle  of  St.  James  ought  to  recur  to  the  remembrance  of 
these  persons  :  "  Whosoever  shall  offend  in  one  point,  he  is 
guilty  of  all."  (ii,  10.)  We  are  also  commanded  to  "lay 
aside,"  not  some  one,  but  "  all  malice,  guile,  and  hypocrisy," 
(1  Pet.  ii,  1,)  that  we  may  thus  the  more  fully  devote  our- 
selves to  God. 

Others  suppose  that,  if  in  some  degree  their  affections  be 
partly  drawn  out  towards  God  and  goodness,  they  have  ade- 
quately discharged  their  duty,  though  in  some  other  part  of 
their  affections  they  are  devoted  to  the  service  of  the  prince  of 
this  world  and  of  sin.  These  men  assuredly  have  forgotten, 
that  God  must  be  adored  and  loved  with  the  whole  affections 
of  the  heart-— that  the  Lord  God  of  Heaven,  and  the  prince  of 
this  world,  are  opposing  masters,  and,  therefore,  that  it  is  im- 
possible to  render  service  to  both  of  them  at  once,,  as  our 
Savior  has  most  expressly  declared. 


204 


JAMES  ABMINIUS. 


ISTot  very  dissimilar  from  this  is  that  invention  by  which 
some  j)ersons  divide  their  time  into  portions,  and  when  they 
have  marked  off  one  part  for  God  and  Christ,  and  another^ 
part  for  the  flesh  and  the  affections,  they  imagine  that  they 
have  most  excellently  performed  their  duty.  But  these  men, 
whosoever  they  be,  never  reflect  that  our  whole  lives,  and  all 
the  time  of  which  they  are  composed,  must  be  consecrated  to 
God,  and  that  we  must  persevere  in  the  ways  of  piety  and 
obedience  to  the  close  of  life  ;  and  for  this  brief  obedience  of 
a  time  which  is  short  at  the  longest,  God  has,  of  grace,  cove- 
nanted to  bestow  on  the  obedient,  that  great  reward  of  life 
eternal.  Undoubtedly,  if  at  any  time  a  man  falls,  he  cannot 
return  into  favor  with  God  until  he  has  not  only  deplored  that 
fall  by  a  sincere  repentance,  and  is  again  converted  in  his 
heart  to  God,  with  this  determination — that  he  will  devote 
the  remaining  days  of  his  life  to  God. 

Those  men  must  not  be  forgotten  who  are  in  this  heresy — 
that  all  those  things  which  are  not  joined  with  blasphemy  to 
God,  and  with  notorious  injury  and  violence  to  one's  neighbor, 
and  which,  with  regard  to  other  things,  bear  the  semblance  of 
charity  and  benevolence,  are  not  to  be  reckoned  among  the 
multitude  of  sins.  According  to  their  doctrine,  they  are  at 
liberty  to  indulge  their  natural  relish  for  earthly  things,  to 
serve  their  belly,  to  take  especial  care  of  themselves,  to  gratify 
their  sensual  and  drunken  propensities,  to  live  the  short  and 
merry  life  which  Epicurus  recommends,  and  to  do  whatsoever 
a  heart  which  is  inclined  to  pleasure  shall  command  ;  provided 
they  abstain  from  anger,  hatred,  the  desire  of  revenge,  bitter- 
ness and  malice,  and  the  other  passions  which  are  armed  for 
'  force  and  injury.  If  we  follow  these  masters,  we  shall  assur- 
edly discover  a  far  more  easy  and  expeditious  way  to  heaven, 
than  that  which  has  been  taught  us  by  the  divine  ambassador 
of  the  great  God,  whose  sole  businesB  it  was  to  point  out  the 
way  to  heaven. 

Occasion  is  also  afforded  to  unjust  conceptions  respecting 
the  exercise  of  piety,  by  the  mode  in  which  some  theological 
subjects  are  treated,  and  by  some  ecclesiastical  phrases  which 
are  either  not  sufficiently  conformable  to  th^  Scriptures,  ox. 


DEDICATION. 


205- 


which  are  not  correctly  understood.  We  must  briefly,  and 
without  much  regard  to  order,  animadvert  on  a  few  of  tliese, 
for  the  sake  of  example.  When  our  good  works  are  invested 
with  the  relation  of  gratitude  towards  God,  it  is  a  well  ascer- 
tained fact,  that  men  collect  from  this  that  they  are  now  the 
heirs  and  proprietors  of  life  eternal,  and  are  in  a  state  of  grace 
and  everlasting  salvation,  before  they  ever  begin  to  perform 
good  works.  This  delusion  makes  them  think  it  expedient 
also  to  follow  the  hypothesis  that  the  performance  of  good 
works  is  not  absolutely  necessary.  In  this  case,  it  must  be 
maintained  from  the  Scriptures,  that  a  true  conversion  and  the 
performance  of  good  works  form  a  prerequisite  condition  before 
justification,  according  to  this  passage  from  St.  John — "  But 
if  we  walk  in  the  light,  as  he  is  in  the  light,  we  have  fellow- 
ship one  with  another,  and  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ,  his  Son^ 
cleanseth  us  from  all  sin."  (1  John  i,  7.)  This  is  consonant 
with  that  celebrated  passage  in  Isaiah,  in  which  the  Lord 
promises  to  the  Jews  the  cleansing  and  the  destruction  of  all 
their  sins,  even  those  which  were  of  the  most  aggravated  kind, 
after  they  turned  themselves  to  him,  and  corrected  their  ways. 
(Isaiah  i,  15-20.)  When  the  sacraments  are  considered  only 
in  the  light  of  sealing  to  us  the  promises  and  the  grace  of  God, 
but  not  as  binding  us  to  the  performance  of  our  duty  and 
admonishing  us  of  it,  [tractatio]  the  discussion  of  them  is  not 
only  defective,  but  it  may  also,  through  such  defect,  be  ac- 
counted injurious  to  the  work  of  personal  piety.  "  Believer 
and  the  regenerate  are  still  prone  and  inclined  to  every  evil;  " 
and  "  the  most  holy  among  them  have  only  the  small  begin- 
nings of  the  obedience  which  is  required."  These  are  phrases 
which  describe,  in  a  manner  far  too  low  and  weak,  the  efiicacy 
of  the  new  creation,  and  they  are,  therefore,  ^ci'ra  tov  p^jrov  in 
reality  exceedingly  dangerous.  For  the  former  of  these  phrases 
seems  entirely  to  remove  all  distinction  between  the  regenerate 
and  the  irregenerate,  while  the  latter  seems  to  place  such 
minutiae  of  obedience  in  the  regenerate,  as  will  induce  a  man, 
who  has  been  accustomed  to  bless  himself  if  he  perceives  even 
the  slightest  thought  or  motion  about  the  performance  of  obe- 


206 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


clience,  immediately  to  conclude  himself  to  be  a  partaker  of 
true  regeneration. 

When  the  continued  imperfection  of  the  regenerate,  and  the 
impossibility  of  keeping  the  law  in  this  life,  are  urged  unsea- 
sonably and  beyond  measure,  without  the  addition  of  what 
may  be  done  by  holy  men  through  faith  and  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  the  tliought  is  apt  to  suggest  itself  to  the  mind  , even  of 
the  most  pious  of  their  hearers,  that  they  can  do  nothing 
which  is  at  all  good.  Through  this  erroneous  view,  it  hap- 
pens that  sometimes  far  less  is  attributed  to  the  regenerate 
than  the  unregenerate  are  themselves  able  to  perform.  The 
ancient  church  did  not  reckon  the  question  about  the  impossi- 
bility of  perforining  the  law  among  those  whicli  are  capital : 
This  is  apparent  from  St.  Augustine  himself,  who  expresses  a 
wish  that  Pelagius  would  acknowledge  it  possible  to  be  per- 
formed by  the  grace  of  Christ,  and  declares  that  peace  would 
then  be  concluded.  The  apostles  of  Christ  were  themselves 
occupied  in  endeavoring  to  convince  men,  when  jDlaced  [extra 
gratiam]  out  of  the  influence  of  grace,  of  their  incapability  to 
perform  obedience.  But  about  the  imperfection  and  impo- 
tency  of  the  regenerate,  you  will  scarcely  find  them  employing 
a  single  expression.  On  the  contrary,  they  attribute  to  be- 
lievers the  crucifying  of  the  flesh  and  the  affections,  the  morti- 
fication of  the  works  of  the  flesh,  a  resurrection  to  a  new  life, 
and  walking  according  to  the  Spirit ;  and  they  are  not  afraid 
openly  to  protest,  that  by  faith  they  overcome  the  world. 
The  acknowledgment  of  their  imperfection  was  but  a  small 
matter,  because  that  was  a  thing  previous  to  Christianity. 
But  the  glory  of  Christians  lies  in  this — that  they  know  the 
power  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  and,  being  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,  they  live  according  to  the  purest  light  of  the 
gospel.  The  distribution  of  theology  into  Gtod,  and  the  acts 
of  God^  introduces  to  us  a  speculative  religion,  and  is  not 
suflaciently  well  calculated  to  urge  men  to  the  performance  of 
their  duty.  To  this  may  be  added  that  too  subtile  disquisi- 
tion, which  is  an  invention  unsanctioned  by  Scripture,  about 
the  relations  of  those  acts  which  are  performed  by  us. 


I   ■  DEDICATION-.  .  207 

As  -unsuitable  for  the  ]3i'omotioii  of  piety,  seems  likewise 
that  deduction  or  [cBGO^iomia]  dispensation  of  our  religion,  by 
which  all  things  are  directed  to  [Jlduciam]  the  assurance  of 
special  m.rcy  as  the  principal  part  of  our  duty,  and  to  the 
consolation  which  is  elicited  from  it  against  the  despair  that 
is  opposed  to  it,  but  in  which  all  things  are  not  directed  to 
the  necessary  performance  of  obedience  in  opposition  to 
security.  It  derives  its  origin  from  the  idea  that  greater  fear 
ought  to  be  entertained  respecting  despair  than  respecting 
security,  when  the  contrary  to  this  is  the  truth.  For  in  the 
whole  history  of  the  Old  and  ^N^ew  Testament,  which  com- 
prises a  period  of  so  many  thousand  years,  only  a  single 
instance  occurs  of  a  person  in  despair,  and  that  was  Judas 
Iscariot,  the  perfidious  betrayer  of  his  Savior — the  case  of 
Cain  being  entirely  out  of  the  question ;  while,  on  the  con- 
trary, as  the  world  was  formerly,  so  is  it  now,  very  full  of 
persons  in  a  state  of  security,  and  negligent  of  the  duty  di- 
vinely imposed  on  them  ;  yet  these  men,  in  the  mean  time, 
sweetly  bless  their  souls,  and  promise  themselves  grace  and 
peace  from  God  in  full  measure. 

To  proceed  further :  To  these  and  all  other  delusions  of  a 
similar  nature,  we  ought  to  oppose  a  soul  truly  pious,  and 
most  firmly  rooted  in  the  faith  of  God  and  Christ,  exercising 
much  solicitous  caution  about  this — not  to  be  called  off  from 
the  serious  and  solid  study  of  piety,  and  not  to  yield  ourselves 
up  to  sins  or  to  take  delight  in  them,  either  through  the  de- 
ceptive force  of  any  conceits,  such  as  have  now  l^en  enumera- 
ted or  any  others,  or  by  the  incautious  use  of  any  phrases  and 
the  sinister  distortion  [tract ationum]  of  particular  subjects ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  denying  all  ungodliness,  let  us  sedulously 
and  constantly  walk  in  the  paths  of  virtue  ;  and  let  us  always 
bear  in  mind  the  very  serious  admonition  which  the  apostle 
Paul  propounds  to  the  Ephesians ;  having  dehorted  them  from 
indulging  in  impurity  and  other  crimes,  he  says  :  "  Let  no 
man  deceive  you  with  vain  words"  or  reasons  ;  "  for,  because 
of  these  things  cometh  the  wrath  of  God  upon  the  children 
of  disobedience."  (Yerse  6.)    It  is  worthy  of  observation,  how 


208 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


significautlj  the  hypothesis  and  arguments  on  which  men 
depend  when  they  bless  themselves  in  their  vices,  are  desig- 
nated as  "  vain  speeches  for  "  vain^''  they  truly  are  ;  that  is, 
false  and  deceitful  are  those  reasons  with  which  men  are  de- 
ceived while  they  are  in  bondage  to  their  lusts,  and  persuade 
themselves  that  they  are  in  a  state  of  grace  and  salvation, 
when,  on  the  contrary,  they  are  in  a  state  of  wrath  and  eternal 
perdition  ;  than  which,  no  other  more  capital  imposture  or 
deception  can  be  produced. 

But,  beside  those  things  of  which  we  have  made  previous 
mention,  ai:d  which  place  obstructions  to  the  progress  of  piety, 
another  also  occurs,  which  particularly  belongs  to  the  subject 
on  which  we  are  now  treating ;  that  is,  the  depraved  and  per- 
verted interpretation  of  certain  passages  of  Scripture,  by  which, 
in  general,  either  all  attention  to  good  works  is  superceded,  or 
in  particular  some  part  of  it  is  weakened.  This  kind  of  hin- 
drance ought  undoubtedly  to  be  reckoned  among  those  which 
are  the  greatest ;  for  thus  either  evil  itself  seems  to  be  estab- 
lished by  divine  authority,  or  a  more  remiss  pursuit  of  good, 
which,  of  the  two,  is  without  exception  the  greater  evil. 
Wherefore,  as  all  those  persons  deserve  praise  who  endeavor 
to  overturn  every  kind  of  hypothesis  that  is  injurious  to  piety, 
so  those  among  them  are  worthy  of  the  highest  commendation 
who  try  to  give  a  correct  interpretation,  and  such  as  is  agreea- 
ble to  "  the  form  of  sound  words,"  of  those  passages  which 
are,  through  common  abuse,  generally  so  explained  as,  by  such 
exposition,  either  directly  or  indirectly  to  countenance  a  dis- 
orderly cours(^  of  life — to  free  them  from  such  a  depraved  in- 
terpretation, and  to  act  as  torch-bearers,  in  a  thing  so  useful 
and  necessary  to  christian  people  and  chiefly  to  the  pastors  of 
the  church.  Many  are  those  passages  which  are  usually  dis- 
torted to  the  injury  of  godliness ;  and  from  which  we  shall  in 
this  place  select  only  the  three  following. 

(1.)  In  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  it  is  said,  "  A  just  man  fall- 
eth  seven  times."  This  sentence  is  in  the  mouth  of  every  one, 
with  this  gloss  superadded,  ''m  aday^^  which  is  an  interpo- 
lation to  be  found  in  the  Latin  Yulgate.    This  passage  ought 


DEDICATION. 


209 


to  be  understood  of  falling  into  misfortune  ;  yet  it  is  most  per- 
versely interpreted  to  signify  a  fall  into  sin,  and  thus  contrib- 
utes to  nourish  vices. 

(2.)  In  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  when  the  Jewish  church, 
after  having  been  defiled  by  manifold  idolatries,  by  her  defec- 
tion from  God,  and  by  other  innumerable  crimes,  w^as  severe- 
ly punished  for  all  these  her  foul  transgressions  ;  in  a  tone 
of  lamentation,  complaining  of  the  heaviness  of  her  punish- 
ment, and  at  the  same  time  making  humble  confession  of  her 
sins,  she  acknowledges,  amongst  other thiugs,  that  "her  right- 
eousnesses are  as  the  cloth  of  a  menstruous  woman,"  designa- 
ting by  this  phrase  the  best  of  those  works  which  she  had  per- 
formed during  her  public  defection.  This  passage,  by  a  per- 
nicious contortion,  is  commonly  corrupted  ;  for  it  is  very  con- 
stantly quoted,  as  if  the  sense  to  be  inferred  from  it  was,  that 
each  of  the  excellent  works  of  the  most  eminent  christians,  and 
therefore  that  the  most  ardent  prayers  poured  forth  in  the 
name  of  Christ,  deeds  of  charity  performed  from  a  heart  truly 
and  inwardly  moved  with  mercy,  and  the  flowing  of  the  blood 
of  martyrs  even  unto  death  for  the  sake  of  Christ — that  all 
these  are  as  the  cloth  of  a  menstruous  woman,  filthy,  detesta- 
ble and  horrid  things,  and  thus  mere  abominations  in  the  sight 
of  God.  And  as  this  name  is,  in  the  Scriptures,  bestowed 
only  on  flagitous  crimes  and  the  greatest  transgressions,  it  fur- 
ther follows  [from  this  mode  of  reasoning]  that  the  best  and 
most  excellent  works  differ  in  no  respect  from  the  most  dread- 
ful wickedness.  "When  a  man  has  once  thoroughly  imbibed 
this  conceit,  will  he  not  cast  away  all  care  and  regard  for 
piety  ?  Will  he  not  consider  it  of  no  great  consequence 
whether  he  leads  a  bad  or  a  good  life  ?  And  will  he  not,  in 
the  mean  time,  indulge  in  the  persuasion,  that  he  can,  not- 
withstanding all  this,  be  a  true  disciple  of  Christ  Jesus  ?  The 
reason,  undoubtedly,  seems  to  be  evident,  since,  according  to 
this  hypothesis,  the  best  works  are  equally  filthy  with  the  worst 
crimes  in  the  sight  of  God. 

(3.)  In  this  number  of  abused  passages  is  included  the  sev- 
enth chapter  of  the  epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Romans,  from  the 
fourteenth  verse  to  the  end  of  the  chapter ;  that  is,  if  the  apos- 


216 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


tie  be  understood,  in  that  chapter,  to  be  speaking  about  a  man 
who  is  regenerated.  For  then  it  will  follow  that  a  renewed 
man  is  still  "  carnal,  and  sold  under  sin,"  that  is,  the  slave  of 
sin  ;  that  "  he  wills  to  do  good,  but  does  it  not ;  but  the  evil 
which  he  wills  not,  that  he  does  nay,  that  he  is  conquered, 
and  "  brought  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin,"  tliat  is,  under 
the  power  and  efficacy  of  sin.  From  this  view  it  is  further 
deduced,  that,  if  any  one  be  regenerate,  it  is  sufficient  for  him 
"  to  will  that  which  is  good,"  though  with  a  will  that  is  in- 
complete, and  that  is  not  followed  by  action  ;  and  "  not  to  will 
that  which  is  evil,"  though  he  actually  perpetrates  it.  If  this 
view  of  that  chapter  be  correct,  then  all  attention  to  piety,  the 
whole  of  new  obedience,  and  thus  the  entire  new  creation,  will 
be  reduced  to  such  narrow  limits  as  to  consist  not  in  effects^ 
but  only  in  affections  or  feelings.  Every  man,  at  first  sight, 
perceives  how  languid,  cold  and  remiss  such  a  belief  will  ren- 
der all  of  us,  both  in  our  abstaining  from  evil,  and  in  the  per- 
formance of  that  which  is  good.  Those,  indeed,  who  defend 
this  opinion,  have  their  subterfuges  and  palliatives  ;  but  they 
are  of  such  a  kind,  that  the  comment  is  generally  repugnant 
to  the  text  on  which  it  is  founded.  AVith  respect  to  the  exer- 
'  I .  cise  of  piety,  it  is  dangerous  for  men  to  have  this  conceit  pre- 

viously impressed  on  their  minds :  "This  chapter  must  be  un- 
derstood about  regenerate  persons;"  for  they  who  hold  it  as  a 
foundation,  in  other  things  wander  wherever  they  are  led  by 
their  feelings,  and  never  recollect  the  glosses  proposed  by  thei|* 
teachers.  This  effect  was  observed  by  St.  Augustine,  and  be- 
ing afraid  of  giving  offence,  in  the  more  early  period  of  his 
christian  career,  he  interpreted  the  passage  as  applicable  to  a 
man  under  the  law,  but  in  his  latter  days  he  applied  it  to  a 
man  under  grace  ;  but  he  held  this  opinion  in  a  much  milder 
form  than  it  is  now  maintained,  and  almost  without  any  inju- 
ry to  godliness.  For  "  the  good''^  which  the  apostle  says  "  he 
willed  but  did  not,"  St.  Augustine  interprets  into  "  a  refrain- 
ing from  concupiscence ;"  and  "  the  eviP  which  the  apostle 
declares  "  he  willed  not  and  yet  did,"  he  interprets  as  "  an  in- 
dulgence in  concupiscence ;" — though  this  novel  interpreta*. 
tion  involves  a  wonderful  mixture  of  the  preceptive  and  pro- 


DEDICATION. 


211 


hibitive  parts  of  the  law.  Modern  interpreters  [among  the 
^Oalvinists]  understand  it  as  relating  to  actual  good  and  evil 
a  most  notable  distinction !  But  as  our  venerated  father 
labored  with  all  diligence  in  removing  the  other  hindrances  of 
pietj,  so  did  he  principally  expend  much  toil  and  unwearied 
study  in  searching  out  the  true  meaning  of  such  passages  of 
Scripture  as  were  imperfectly  understood,  particularly  if  they 
placed  a  stumbling-block  in  the  way  of  those  who  were  studi- 
ous of  piety.  If,  in  that  species  of  labor,  he  ever  had  eminent 
success,  it  must  undoubtedly  be  confessed  that  it  was  in  his 
attempts  on  this  seventh  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans  ; 
for  he  wrote  a  commentary  on  it  of  great  length,  which,  with 
the  greatest  accuracy,  he  prepared  and  finished,  and  which  we 
now  publish. 

'  When  he  returned  from  Geneva  to  his  native  country,  he 
understood  this  very  chapter  as  it  is  now  commonly  ex- 
plained ;  having  been  instructed  in  that  view  of  it  by  his 
teachers,  whose  authority  was  so  great  among  the  students, 
that  not  one  of  the  latter  durst  even  inquire  about  any  thing 
which  they  uttered.  But  when,  in  the  exercise  of  his  minis- 
try in  the  church  of  Amsterdam,  he  had  afterwards  taken  the 
epistle  to  the  Romans  as  the  subject  of  a  series  of  discourses 
from  the  pulpit,  and  when  he  had  come  to  the  explication  of 
the  seventh  chapter,  concerning  the  received  interpretation  of 
which  he  had  then  begun  to  conceive  scruples  in  his  mind, 
because  it  seemed  both  to  undervalue  the  grace  of  regenera- 
tion and  to  diminish  all  zeal  and  attention  to  piety  ;  he  dili- 
gently considered  the  chapter  from  the  beginning  to  the  con- 
clusion with  a  good  conscience,  as  it  was  proper  that  he  should 
do,  and  as  the  nature  of  his  public  function  required  ;  he  col- 
lated it  with  those  passages  which  preceded  it  and  followed  ; 
he  revolved  all  of  them,  in  their  several  particulars,  as  in  the 
presence  of  God  ;  he  read  all  the  various  commentators  upon 
it  which  he  could  procure,  whether  among  the  ancients,  those 
of  the  middle  ages,  or  among  the  moderns  ;  and,  at  length, 
after  having  frequently  invoked  the  name  and  aid  of  Almighty 
God,  and  having  derived  his  chief  human  assistance  from  the 
commentaries  of  Bucer  and  Musculus  on  that  part  of  Holy 


212 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


Writ,  he  discovered  that  the  received  interpretation  could  not 
bear  the  scrutiny  of  truth,  but  that  the  passage  was  to  be  en- 
tirely understood  in  reference  to  a  man  living  under  the  law, 
in  whom  the  law  has  discharged  its  office,  and  who,  therefore, 
feeling  true  contrition  in  his  soul  on  account  of  sins,  and  be- 
ing convinced  of  the  incapability  of  the  law  to  save  him,  in- 
quires after  a  deliverer,  and  is  not,  in  fact,  a  regenerated  man, 
but  stands  in  the  nearest  grade  to  regeneration.  This  explan- 
ation of  the  chapter  he  publicly  delivered  from  the  pulpit ; 
because  he  thought  that  such  a  course  was  allowable  by  the 
liberty  of  prophesying,  which  ought  always  to  have  a  place 
in  the  church  of  Christ.  Though  this  diligence  in  elucidating 
the  Scriptures,  and  the  candor  which  he  displayed,  deserved 
singular  praise  and  commendation,  especially  from  all  persons 
of  the  ecclesiastical  order,  yet,  by  some  zealots,  in  whom  such 
a  conduct  was  the  least  becoming,  it  was  received  in  a  manner 
which  shewed  that  the  author  ranked  no  higher  with  them 
than  as  one  who,  instead  of  receiving  a  reward,  ought  to  be 
charged  with  mischief  and  insanity.  Such  is  the  result  of 
employing  a  sedulous  care  in  the  investigation  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  of  cultivating  the  liberty  of  prophesying  ;  and  it  is 
esteemed  a  preferable  service,  to  render  the  servants  of  Christ 
the  slaves  of  certain  men  who  lived  only  a  short  time  before 
ourselves,  and  almost  to  canonize  their  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures  as  the  only  rule  and  guide  for  us  in  our  interpreta- 
tion. 

When  our  father  perceived  these  things,  he  began  to  write 
this  commentary,  which  at  length  he  brought  to  a  conclusion. 
If  God  had  granted  him  longer  life,  he  would  have  corrected 
his  production  with  greater  accuracy,  as  he  had  already  begun 
to  do  ;  but  as  he  was  prevented  by  death,  and  thus  rendered 
incapable  of  giving  it  a  final  polish,  and  yet  as,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  many  great  men,  it  is  a  work  that  is  worthy  to  see 
the  light,  we  have  now  ventured  to  publish  it.  Here  then, 
FIRST,  the  author  proposes  his  own  sentiments,  and  proves  them 
by  deductions  from  the  entire  chapter,  as  well  as  from  the 
connection  in  which  it  stands  with  the  preceding  and  follow- 
ing chapters.    Secondly.  He  shews  that  this  interpretation 


DEDICATION. 


213 


ha8  never  been  condemned,  but  has  always  had  the  greatest 
number  of  supporters.  Thirdly.  He  defends  it  from  the  black 
charge  of  Pelagianism,  and  demonstrates  that  it  is  directly 
opposed  to  that  error.  Foukthly.  He  contends  that  the  in- 
terpretation now  generally  received  is  quite  new,  and  was  never 
embraced  by  any  of  the  ancients,  but  rejected  by  many  of 
them.  Lastly.  And  that  it  is  injurious  to  grace  and  hurtful 
to  good  morals.  He  then  enters  into  a  comparison  of  the 
opinion  of  St.  Augustine,  and  of  that  which  is  now  generally 
received  with  his  own  interpretation  ;  and  concludes  the  work 
with  a  friendly  address  to  his  fellow-ministers. 

It  w  s  our  wish,  most  noble  Bardesius,  to  dedicate  and  ad- 
dress this  work  to  your  mightiness ;  for  this  desire,  we  had 
several  reasons.  From  the  first  entrance  on  his  ministry,  a 
sacred  friendship  subsisted  between  our  revered  father  and  that 
nobleman  of  honored  memory,  your  excellent  father — a  friend- 
ship which  continued  till  our  venerable  parent  came  down  to 
the  grave,  full  of  years  and  loaded  with  honors.  You,  as  the 
lawful  inherit(jr  of  your  father's  possessions,  have  also  succeed- 
ed ill  his  place  .  s  the  heir  of  his  friendships  ;  and  this  is  the 
reason  why  the  closest  intimacy  was  formed  between  you  and 
our  good  father,  immediately  alter  your  return  from  your 
travels,  which  you  had  undertaken  for  the  purpose  of  prose- 
cuting your  studies  and  visiting  foreign  nations.  You  were 
accustomed  to  place  a  high  estimate  on  his  endowments,  and 
frequently  consumed  him  on  questions  of  theology,  and  very 
often  acted  upon  his  advice — as  he  did,  also,  upon  yours. 
But  after  he  had  reflected  in  his  mind,  that  he  was  not  the 
slave  of  men,  but  the  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  he  was 
under  an  oath  [to  the  observance  of]  his  words  alone,  when, 
on  this  account,  he  had  begun  freely  to  inquire  into  the  senti- 
ments invented  by  men,  and  into  their  truth  and  necessity, 
and,  after  coinparing  them  with  the  Scriptures,  had  also  occa- 
sionally proposed,  with  great  modesty,  his  doubts  concerning 
them,  and  his  animadversions  on  them — when  for  this  reason, 
many  of  those  who  were  formerly  his  acquaintances  and  inti- 
mate h'iends,  became  alienated  from  him  as  from  one  who  had 
removed  the  ancient  land-marks  out  of  their  places ;  and  when 


2M 


JAMES  AitMINIUS. 


some  of  them,  by  degrees,  both  in  public  and  private,  began 
either  to  take  an  occasion  or  to  make  one,  to  circulate  sinister 
reports  concerning  him,  while  others,  with  sufficient  plainness, 
openly  renounced  all  friendship  with  him ;  and  when  the 
whole  chorus  of  ecclesiastical  zealots  had  excited  each  other 
to  rise  up  against  him  ;  yet,  amidst  all  these  things,  you  took 
no  offence,  but,  having  weighed  the  matter  in  the  just  bal- 
ance of  your  judgment,  you  persisted  to  cherish  a  constant 
love  for  him.  When  he  was  debilitated  by  a  slow  and  con- 
stant malady,  as  soon  as  the  mildness  of  the  weather  and  the 
intervals  in  his  disorder  would  permit  his  removal,  ^''ou  invi- 
ted him  to  your  house  in  a  manner  the  most  friendly,  and,  on 
his  arrival,  you  received  him  as  the  angel  of  the  Lord ;  and  a 
friendship,  thus  pure  and  refined,  you  cultivated  with  him, 
until  he  departed  out  of  this  life,  and  ascended  to  Christ,  his 
Lord  and  Master.  Besides,  after  his  decease,  by  your  con- 
duct to  our  afflicted  family,  you  shewed  yourself  such  a  one 
as  it  became  that  man  to  be  who  was  not  a  pretended  friend 
to  the  survivors  of  his  departed  friend — affording,  by  words 
and  deeds,  such  substantial  proofs  of  your  kindness  and  be- 
neficence towards  his  sorrowing  widow  and  distressed  orphans, 
as  far  exceed  the  feebleness  of  our  expressions.  Therefore,  un- 
less we  wished  not  only  to  be  the  most  ungrateful  of  mortals, 
but  likewise  to  be  generally  depicted  as  such,  it  was  exceed- 
ingly proper  in  us,  while  the  posthumous  writings  of  our  rever- 
ed parent  are  occasionally  issuing  from  the  press,  to  inscribe 
some  portion  of  them  to  your  very  honorable  and  most  friend- 
ly name,  and  by  this  method,  as  by  a  public  document,  to 
testify  at  once  before  tlie  whole  world  our  gratitude  to  you  as 
well  as  our  vast  obligations. 

To  these  considerations,  we  may  add  that  our  father  had 
determined  within  himself,  if  God  had  granted  him  life  and 
leisure,  to  write  a  system  of  the  whole  Christian  religion,  not 
drawing  it  out  of  the  stagnant  lakes  of  Egypt,  but  out  of  the 
pure  fountains  of  Israel,  and  to  inscribe  it  to  your  mightiness. 
As  he  was  unable  to  execute  his  purpose,  partly  through  the 
multiplicity  of  his  engagements,  and  partly  through  the  lin- 
gering nature  of  his  disorder,  you  have  here,  in  the  place  of 


DEDICATION. 


215 


the  other  work,  the  present  commentary  ;  for  in  no  other  way 
than  this,  can  the  design  of  our  father  now  be  fulfilled.  We 
hope  the  subject  itself,  which  is  treated  in  this  commentary, 
will  not  be  disagreeable  to  you ;  for  it  is  one  which  is  excel- 
lently accordant  with  your  genius  and  disposition.  It  is  a  fact 
which  is  well  known  to  all  those  who  are  acquainted  with  you, 
and  which  you  do  not  wish  to  be  regarded  as  a  secret,  but 
which  you  ojjenly  profess,  as  often  as  occasion  demands,  that 
you  take  no  delight  in  those  thorny  disputations  and  discus- 
sions which  contribute  nothing  to  the  practice  ot  the  Christian 
life ;  but  that  you  place  the  chief  part  of  religion  in  the  true 
pursuit  of  real  and  solid  piety.  As  our  honored  father  also 
shews  in  this  work  that  his  wishes  and  purposes  were  in  this 
respect  similar  to  yours,  we  have  thought  that  nothing  could 
be  more  appropriate  than  to  dedicate  to  a  man  of  extensive 
learning,  who  is  likewise  deeply  attached  to  the  interests  of 
religion,  a  work  which  is  highly  conducive  to  the  promotion 
of  i)iety. 

Accept,  therefore,  with  a  cheerful  heart  and  a  serene  coun- 
tenance, this  small  gift,  which  we  and  our  dear  mother  are 
desirous  to  commit  to  posterity,  that  it  may  perpetually  re- 
main as  an  endless  monument  of  that  sacred  friendship  which 
subsisted  between  you  and  James  Akminius,  our  venerated 
parent,  and,  at  the  same  time,  of  our  own  great  obligations  to 
you.  To  you,  who  have  been  under  the  influence  of  mercy 
towards  our  afflicted  family,  may  the  Lord  God  in  return  shew 
mercy ;  and  may  he  enrich  you  and  your  very  honorable  fam- 
ily with  every  kind  of  heavenly  blessings,  to  the  glory  of  his 
name  and  to  the  salvation  of  all  of  us  !  Amen. 

So  pray  those  who  are  most  attached  to  your  mightiness. 
The  I^Tine  Orphan  Childeen  or  James  ) 
Aeminius,  of  Oudewatee.  J 

Leyden,  13th  August,  1G12. 


A  DISSEETATION 

ON 

THE  TRUE  AND  GENUINE  SENSE 

OP 

THE  SEVENTH  CHAPTEE  OF  THE  EPISTLE  TO 
THE  EOMANS. 

BY  JAMES  AKMESnUS,  D.  D. 


This  admirable  treatise  was  prepared  about  the  close  of  the  year  1599,  while 
the  author  was  a  pastor  at  Amsterdam. 

IKTEODUCTIOlSr. 

1.  What  is  the  subject  of  inquiry  concerning  the  meaning  of 
this  chapter  7  2.  The  manner  in  which  this  question  is 
made  a  subject  of  disj^ute  ;  formerly^  a  latitude  of  senti- 
ment resj^ecting  it^  was  permitted.  3.  Those  who  exp>lain 
this  passage  as  relating  to  a  man  under  the  law^  are  rashly 
charged  with  having  some  affinity  with  the  Pelagian  here- 
by. 4.  Distribution  of  the  subjects  to  be  discussed  in  this 
Commentary. 

1.  The  subject  of  inquiry  concerning  the  meaning  of  the 
seventh  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Eomans,  and  particularly 
of  the  latter  part  of  it,  which  is  treated  upon  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fourteenth  or  fifteenth  verse  to  the  end  of  the 
chapter,  is  this  :    "  Does  the  apostle  there  treat  of  himself, 

15  TOL  II. 


218 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


such  as  he  then  was  ?"  Or,  which  is  almost  the  same  question, 
"  Under  his  own  person,  does  he  treat  about  a  man  living  in 
the  possession  of  the  grace  of  Christy  or  does  he  there  person- 
ate a  man  placed  wider  the  law  ?"  This  question  is  also  usually 
proposed  in  other  words,  thus  :  "  Does  the  apostle  there  ti  eat 
about  a  man  who  is  still  unr eg ener ate ^  or  about  one  who  is  al- 
ready regenerated  through  the  Spirit  of  Christ  ?"  The  lat- 
ter question  difiersa  little  in  its  meaning  from  the  former,  (1,) 
because  the  word  "  unre generate''''  has  a  more  extensive  sig- 
nification, embracing  even  those  who  are  under  the  law,  and 
at  whose  state  the  apostle  has  also  briefly  glanced  in  the  ninth 
verse  of  this  chapter,  and  (2,)  because  the  same  word,  with 
Bome  persons,  denotes  not  only  the  mere  absence  of  regene- 
ration, but  likewise  of  all  those  things  which  are  necessarily 
previous  to  regeneration  ;  and  these  previous  things  are  so  far 
from  being  excluded  by  the  words,  "  under  the  law^''  that,  on 
tlie  contrarj",  a  great  part  of  them  is  necessarily  comprehend- 
ed in  the  ample  compass  of  that  state  which  these  words  de- 
6cribe.  This  ought  not  to  be  passed  over  without  some  ani- 
madversion ;  because  this  notion  about  the  word  unregene- 
rate'''  which  many  persons  have  previously  formed,  is  no 
email  cause  why  they  think  they  must  reject  the  opinion 
which  declares  that  this  passage  of  Scripture  relates  to  an  un- 
regenerate  man,  that  is,  to  one  not  only  devoid  of  regenera- 
tion, but  likewise  of  all  those  things  which  usually  precede 
regeneration ;  and  why  they  suppose  that  they  ought  to  ap- 
prove of  the  one  contrary  to  this,  without  any  further  attentive 
consideration  of  the  words  and  of  the  things  signified. 

2.  But  this  question  has  now  become  a  subject  of  dispute, 
not  as  one  of  those  about  which  the  writers  who  treat  on  Cath- 
olic doctrine  may  be  allowed  to  maintain  different  sentiments, 
but  as  if  it  was  one  of  such  importance  and  weight  to  the  truth 
of  faith,  that,  without  great  detriment  to  truth  and  manifest 
heresy,  no  determination  can  be  njade  concerning  it  except  in 
one  way,  which  is  the  affirmation  that  the  apostle  is  there 
treating  about  a  man  who  lives  under  grace  and  is  regenerate. 
This  judgment  about  the  question  seems  new  to  me,  and  is  one 
which  was  never  heard  in  the  church  before  these  our  times. 


DISSERTATION. 


219 


In  those  better  days,  liberty  was  granted  to  the  divines  of  the 
church  to  maintain  an  opinion  on  the  one  part  of  this  question  or 
on  the  other,  provided  they  did  not  produce  an  explanation 
of  their  meaning  that  was  at  variance  with  the  articles  and 
doctrines  ot  faith.  The  thing  itself  will  shew  that  it  is  possible 
to  do  so  in  this  matter ;  and  such  was  the  persuasion  which 
was  entertained  on  the  subject  by  those  who  granted  this  lib- 
erty of  sentiment,  because  no  man  ever  supposed  that  any 
opinion  was  to  be  tolerated  in  the  church  which  could  not 
admit  of  an  explanation  that  was  agreeable  to  the  doctrines 
and  articles  of  belief. 

3.  Those  who  explain  this  passage  in  reference  to  a  man 
living  under  the  law,  are  charged  with  holding  a  doctrine 
which  has  some  affinity  to  the  two-fold  heresy  of  Pelagius,  and 
are  said  to  ascribe  to  man,  without  the  grace  of  Christ,  some 
true  and  saving  good,  and,  taking  away  the  contest  between 
the  flesh  and  the  spirit  which  is  carried  on  in  the  regenerate, 
are  said  to  maintain  a  perfection  ot  righteousness  in  the  pres- 
ent life.  But  I  ingenuously  confess  that  I  detest,  from  my 
heart,  the  consequences  which  are  here  deduced  ;  in  the  mean 
time,  I  do  not  perceive  how  they  can  flow  from  such  an  opin- 
ion. If  any  one  will  deign  to  prove  this,  I  will  instantly  ab- 
jure an  opinion  thus  \_i)rcBcedaneunb\  conducting  to  heresy; 
knowing  that  nothing  can  be  true,  from  which  a  falsehood 
may,  by  good  consequence,  be  concluded.  But  if  this  cannot 
be  demonstrated,  and  if  I  can  make  it  evident  that  neither 
these  heresies,  nor  any  other,  are  derived  from  this  opinion 
when  it  is  properly  explained,  then,  under  these  circumstan- 
ces, it  seems  that  I  may  require,  in  my  own  right,  that  no 
molestation  shall  be  offered  to  me,  or  to  any  one  else,  on  ac- 
count of  this  opinion.  If  I  shall  confirm  this  opinion  by  ar- 
guments which  are  not  only  probable,  but  likewise  incapable 
of  refutation,  or  which  at  least  have  a  greater  semblance  of 
probability  than  those  by  which  the  contrary  opinion  is  sup- 
ported, then  let  me  be  allowed  to  request  that,  by  at  least  an 
equal  right,  this  sentiment  may  obtain  a  place  with  the  other 
in  the  church.    If,  lastl}^,  I  shall  prove  that  the  other  opinion, 


220 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


as  it  is  in  these  days  explained  by  most  divines,  cannot,  with- 
out the  greatest  difficulty,  be  reconciled  to  many  of  the  plain- . 
est  passages  of  Scripture,  that  it  is  in  no  small  degree  injurious 
to  the  grace  of  the  indwelling  Spirit,  that  it  has  a  hurtful  effect 
on  good  morals,  and  that  it  was  never  approved  by  any  of  the 
ancient  fathers  of  the  church,  but,  on  the  contrary,  disappro- 
ved by  some  of  them,  and  even  to  St.  Augustine  himself ;  then 
may  I  be  permitted  by  a  most  deserved  right  to  admonish  the 
defenders  of  that  other  sentiment,  that  they  reflect  frequently 
and  seriously,  whether  they  be  wishful  to  excite  the  wrath  of 
God  against  themselves  by  an  unjust  condemnation  of  this 
better  opinion  and  of  those  who  are  its  defenders. 

4.  Having  premised  these  things,  let  us  now  enter  on  the 
matter  itself,  which  shall  be  treated  by  us  after  being  distrib- 
uted in  the  following  parts  : 

I.  I  will  show  that,  in  this  passage,  the  apostle  does  not  speak 
about  himself,  nor  about  a  man  living  under  grace,  but  that  he 
has  transferred  to  himself  the  person  of  a  man  placed  under 
the  law. 

n.  I  will  make  it  evident  that  this  opinion  has  never  been 
condemned  in  the  church  as  heretical,  but  that  it  has  always 
had  some  defenders  among  the  divines  of  the  church. 

m.  I  will  show  that  no  heresy,  neither  that  of  Pelagius, 
nor  any  other,  can  be  derived  from  this  opinion,  but  that  it  is 
most  evidently  opposed  to  Pelagianism,  and  that  in  a  most 
distinguished  manner  and  designedly,  it  refutes  the  grand 
falsehood  of  Pelagius. 

Confining  myself  within  the  bounds  of  necessary  defence,  I 
might,  after  having  explained  these  three  heads,  conclude  this 
treatise,  unless  it  might  seem  to  some  one  advisable  and  use- 
ful to  confute  by  equal  arguments  the  contrary  opinion,  espe- 
cially as  it  is  explained  in  these  days.  This  I  will  attempt  in 
other  two  chapters,  subjoined  to  the  preceding  three,  which 
will  then  be  analogous  and  appear  as  parallels  to  the  last 
two. 

lY.  Therefore,  I  will  prove  that  the  meaning  which  some 
of  our  modem  divines  attribute  to  the  apostle  in  this  passage, 


DISSERTATION. 


221 


was  not  approved  by  any  of  the  ancient  fathers  of  the  church, 
not  even  by  St.  Augustine  himself,  but  that  it  was  repudiated 
and  confuted  by  him  and  some  others. 

Y.  And,  lastly,  I  will  demonstrate,  that  this  opinion,  as 
explained  in  these  days  by  many  persons,  is  not  only  injmi- 
ous  to  grace,  but  likewise  adverse  to  good  morals. 

God  grant  that  I  may  meditate  and  write  nothing  but  what 
is  agreeable  to  his  sacred  truth.  If,  however,  any  thing  of  a 
contrary  kind  should  escape  from  me,  which  is  a  fault  of  easy 
occurrence  to  one  who  "  knows  but  in  part,  and  prophesies  in 
part I  wish  that  neither  to  be  [considered  as]  spoken  nor 
written.  I  make  this  previous  protestation  against  any  such 
thing ;  and  will,  in  reality,  declare  those  things  which  possess 
greater  truth  and  certainty,  when  any  one  has  taught  them 
to  me. 


FIKST  PAET. 

I.  THE  TEEESIS  TO  BE  PROVED. 

1.  A  description  of  the  terms  contained  in  the  Thesis.  2. 
The  reason  why  the  description  of  the  a/postle  is  here  omit- 
ted. 3.  What  is  meant  hy  "  being  under  the  law  ?"  4. 
What  it  is  to  he  "  under  grace?''  5.  What  is  meant  hy 
"a  regenerate  mamjf  6.  Who  is  ^'a/n  unregenerate 
manf 

The  apostle,  in  this'^passage,  is  treating  neither  about  him- 
self, such  as  he  then  was,  nor  about  a  man  living  under  grace ; 
but  he  has  transferred  to  himself  the  person  of  a  man  placed 
under  the  law. 

Or  as  some  other  persons  express  it — the  apostle,  in  this 
passage,  is  not  treating  about  a  man  who  is  already  regene- 
rate through  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  but  {suscepisse']  has  assumed 
the  person  of  a  man  who  is  not  yet  regenerate. 


222 


JAMES  ABMmiUS. 


1.  To  the  proof  of  the  thesis,  must  be  premised  and  prefix- 
ed definitions  or  descriptions  of  the  subjects  which  it  compri- 
ses. The  subjects  are — the  apostle  himself^  a  man  placed 
under  grace^  a  man  placed  under  the  law^  a  man  regeneratQ 
hy  the  Spirit  of  Christy  and  a  man  not  yet  regenerate, 

2.  I  have  set  the  apostle  apart  from  those  who  are  regene- 
rate and  placed  under  grace,  not  because  I  would  take  him 
away  from  the  number  of  regenerate  persons,  among  whom  he 
holds  a  conspicuous  station,  but  because  some  people  have 
thought  proper  to  deduce,  from  the  description  of  the  apostol- 
ical perfection,  arguments  by  which  they  prove,  that  the  apos- 
tle could  not,  in  this  passage,  be  speaking  concerning  himself, 
as  he  then  was ;  because  those  things  which  he  here  ascribes 
to  himself  are  at  variance  with  some  things  that,  in  other 
passages,  he  writes  about  himself,  and  because  they  are  a  dis- 
grace to  his  eminent  state  of  grace,  and  to  his  progress  in  faith 
and  newness  of  life.  But  since  it  is  certain,  that  the  apostle 
has  not,  in  this  chapter,  treated  of  himself  personally,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  all  other  men  of  whatsoever  condition  or  order 
they  may  be,  but  that  he,  under  his  own  person,  described  a 
certain  kind  and  order  of  men,  whether  they  be  those  who  are 
under  the  law  and  not  yet  regenerate,  or  those  who  are  regen- 
erate and  placed  under  grace,  omitting  the  description  of  the 
apostle,  we  will  first  see  what  is  meant  by  heing  under  grace 
and  under  the  law,,  and  what  by  heing  regenerate^  and  not  yet 
regenerate  or  unregenerate  j  yet  we  will  do  this  in  such  a  man- 
that,  in  the  subsequent  establishment  of  our  own  opinion,  we 
may  produce  arguments  drawn  from  the  description  given  by 
the  apostle. 

3.  The  expression,  therefore,  to  he  under  the  law^  does  not 
signify  merely  that  the  man  is  liable  to  perform  it,  or  that  he 
is  bound  to  obey  the  commands  of  the  law ;  in  which  sense 
all  men  generally,  both  those  who  are  said  in  the  ninth  verse 
of  this  chapter  to  be  "  without  law,"  are  reckoned  to  be  under 
the  law  by  right  of  creation,  and  those  also  who  are  under 
grace,  are  considered  to  be  under  the  law  by  the  further  right 
of  redemption  and  sanctification,  and  yet  in  such  a  manner  as 


DISSEKTATION. 


223 


not  to  be  under  its  rigor,  because  they  are  under  the  law  to 
Christ,  who  makes  his  people  free  from  the  rigor  of  the  law. 
But  because  the  office  of  the  law  concerning  sinners  is  two- 
fold— the  one^  to  conclude  sinners  under  the  guilt  of  that  pun- 
ishment which  is  denounced  by  the  law  against  transgressors, 
and  to  condemn  them  by  its  sentence — t\\e  other ^  first  to  in- 
struct sinners  and  to  give  them  assurance  about  its  equity,  jus- 
tice and  holiness,  and  afterwards  to  accuse  them  of  sin,  to  urge 
them  to  obedience,  to  convince  them  of  their  own  weak- 
ness, to  terrify  them  by  a  dread  of  punishment,  to  compel 
them  to  seek  deliverance,  and,  generallj^,  to  lead,  govern  and 
actuate  sinners  according  to  its  efficacy.  Therefore,  with  re- 
gard to  the  first  office  of  the  law,  all  sinners  universally  are 
said  to  be  under  it,  even  those  who  are  without  law  and  have 
sinned  without  it ;  "  for  they  shall  also  perish  without  law 
(Rom.  ii,  12  ;)  yet  they  are  not  to  be  condemned  without  a  just 
sentence  of  the  law.  In  relation  to  the  second  office  of  the 
law,  they  are  said  to  be  under  its  dominion,  government,  lord- 
ship and  (pedagogy)  tutelage,  who  are  ruled  and  actuated  by 
the  efficacy  and  guidance  of  the  law,  in  whom  it  exerts  its 
power,  and  exercises  these  its  operations,  whether  some  of 
them  or  all,  whether  more  or  less,  in  which  respect  there  may 
be,  and  really  are,  different  degrees  and  orders  of  those  per- 
sons who  are  said,  in  this  second  view,  to  be  under  the  law. 
But  in  this  passage,  we  define  a  man  under  the  law  to  be 
"one  who  is  under  its  entire  efficacy  and  all  its  operations 
the  design  of  the  apostle  requiring  this,  as  we  shall  afterwards 
perceive. 

4.  This  phrase  "  to  be  under  grace,"  answers  in  opposition 
to  the  other  of  being  "  under  the  law,"  since  the  effect  of  this 
grace  is  two-fold.  The  first  is,  to  absolve  a  sinful  man  from 
the  guilt  of  sin  and  from  condemnation  ;  the  second  is,  to 
endow  man  with  the  Spirit  of  adoption  and  of  regeneration, 
and  by  that  Spirit  to  vivify  or  quicken,  to  lead,  actuate  and 
govern  him.  Hence,  not  only  are  they  said  to  be  "  under 
grace"  who  are  free  from  guilt  and  condemnation,  but  like- 
wise they  who  are  governed  and  actuated  by  the  guidance  of 
grace  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit.    But  since  we  are  in  this  place 


2M 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


discussing,  not  properly  the  condemnation  of  sin,  but  the 
tyranny  and  dominion  which  it  violently  exercises  over  those 
who  are  its  subjects,  by  compelling  them  with  its  own  force 
to  yield  it  complete  obedience,  and  to  which  are  opposed  in 
vain  the  efficacy  and  power  of  the  law ;  and  since  we  are 
now  treating,  not  about  the  remission  of  sins,  but  about  that 
grace  which  inhibits  or  restrains  the  force  of  this  tyrant  and 
lord,  and  which  leads  men  to  yield  it  due  obedience  ;  there- 
fore we  must  restrict  the  expressions,  "  to  be  under  the  law," 
and  "  to  be  under  grace,"  to  the  latter  signification — that  he 
is  "  under  the  law"  who  is  governed  and  actuated  by  the 
guidance  of  the  law,  and  that  he  is  "  under  grace"  who  is 
governed  and  actuated  by  the  guidance  of  grace.  This  will 
be  rendered  evident  from  the  fourteenth  verse  of  th-e  sixth 
chapter,  when  accurately  compared  with  the  preceding  and 
following  verses  of  the  same  chapter,  and  from  the  seven- 
teenth and  eighteenth  verses  of  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  epistle 
to  the  Gralatians,  when  they  are  properly  applied  to  this 
matter.  Yet  if  any  one  be  desirous  of  extending  these  pas- 
sages to  the  two-fold  signification  of  each  of  the  expressions, 
he  has  my  free  permission  for  such  extension ;  for  it  cannot 
prove  the  least  hindrance  in  the  inquiry  and  discovery  of  the 
truth  of  the  matter  which  is  the  subject  of  our  present  dis- 
cussion. 

5.  Let  us  now  see  about  the  regenerate  and  the  unregene- 
rate  man.  That  we  may  define  him  with  strictness,  as  it  is 
propor  to  do  in  oppositions  and  distinctions,  we  say  that  a 
regenerate  man  is  one  who  is  so  called,  not  from  the  com- 
menced  act  or  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  though  this  is 
regeneration,  but  from  the  same  act  or  operation  when  it  is 
perfected  with  respect  to  its  essential  parts,  though  not  with 
respect  to  its  quantity  and  degree  ;  he  is  not  one  "  who  was 
once  enlightened,  and  has  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift,  and  was 
made  partaker  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  who  has  tasted  the 
good  word  of  God,  and  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come ;" 
(Heb.  vi,  4,  5  ;)  because  the  explanation  given  by  most  of 
our  divines  to  this  passage,  applies  only  to  unregenerate  per- 
sons.   ITeither  is  he  on©  who  "has  escaped  the  pollutions  of 


DISSERTATION. 


225 


the  world  through  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord  and  Savior 
Jesus  Christ,  and  who  has  known  the  way  of  righteousness 
(2  Pet.  ii,  20,  21 ;)  for  they  explain  this  passage  also  as  appli- 
cable solely  to  the  unregenerate.    'Nor  is  it  a  man  who  "  hear- 
eth  the  law,  and  has  the  work  of  the  law  written  in  his  heart, 
whose  thoughts  mutually  accuse  or  else  excuse  themselves, 
who  rests  in  the  law,  makes  his  boast  of  God,  knows  his  will, 
and  approves  the  things  that  are  more  excellent,  being 
instructed  out  of  the  law."  (Rom.  ii,  13-18.)    I^either  is  he 
one  who  "has  prophesied  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  in  his 
name  cast  out  devils;"  (Matt,  vii,  22;)  and  who  "has  all 
faith,  so  that  he  could  remove  mountains."  (1  Cor.  xiii,  2.) 
l^or  is  he  one  who  acknowledges  himself  to  be  a  sinner, 
mourns  on  account  of  sin,  and  is  affected  with  godly  sorrow, 
and  who  is  fatigued  and  "  heavy  laden"  under  the  burden  of 
his  sins  ;  (Matt,  xi,  28  ;) '  for  such  persons  as  these  Christ 
came  to  call,  and  this  call  precedes  justification  and  sanctifica- 
tion,  that  is,  regeneration.  (Rom.  viii,  30.)    Neither  is  it  he 
who  "  knows  himself  to  be  wretched,  and  miserable,  and  poor, 
and  blind,  and  naked ;"  for  this  is  the  man  whom  Christ 
"  counsels  to  buy"  of  him  the  things  necessary  for  himself. 
(Rev.  iii,  IT,  18.)    This  interpretation  is  not  invalidated  by 
the  fact  that  the  church  of  Laodicea  is  said  not  to  know  her- 
self; for  the  "  counsel"  or  advice  bestowed  will  never  per- 
suade her  to  buy  those  things  of  Christ,  unless  she  have  pre- 
viously known  herself  to  be  such  a  one  as  is  there  described. 
Nor  is  he  one  who  knows  that  a  man  cannot  be  justified  by 
the  works  of  the  law,  and  who,  from  this  very  circumstance, 
is  compelled  to  fiee  to  Christ,  that  in  him  he  may  obtain  jus- 
tification. (Gal.  ii,  16.)    Nor  is  he  a  man,  who,  acknowledging 
himself  as  being  unworthy  even  to  lift  up  his  eyes  to  heaven, 
and  who,  smiting  on  his  breast,  has  exclaimed,  God  he  mer- 
ciful to  me  a  sinner  I 

This  has  been  well  observed  by  Beza  in  his  Refutation  of 
the  calumnies  of  Tilman  Heshusius,  where  he  makes  a  beau- 
tiful distinction  between  "  the  things  which  precede  regenera- 
tion" and  "  regeneration  itself,"  and  thus  expresses  himself : 
"  It  is  one  thing  to  inquire  by  what  methods  God  prepares  us 


226 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


for  repentance  or  lre?iovat{one7n]  newness  of  life,  and  it  is  an- 
other to  treat  on  repentance  itself.  Let,  therefore,  the  ac- 
knowledgment of  sin  and  godly  sorrow  be  the  beginning  of 
repentance,  but  so  far  as  God  begins  in  this  way  to  prepare  113 
for  newness  of  life,  in  which  respect  it  was  the  practice  of 
Calvin  deservedly  to  call  this  fear  initial.  Besides,  in  the  de- 
scription of  penitence  we  are  not  so  accustomed  as  some  people 
are,  to  call  the-e  dreadful  qualms  of  conscience  the  mortifica- 
tion of  the  flesh  or  of  the  old  man  /  though  we  know  that 
the  word  of  God  is  compared  to  a  sword,  which,  in  some  man- 
ner, slays  us,  tliat  we  may  offer  ourselves  for  a  sacrifice  to 
God  ;  and  St.  Paul  somewhere  calls  afflictions  [inortification- 
m%\  the  death  of  Christ  which  we  carry  about  with  us  in  the 
body.  For  it  is  very  evident  that,  by  the  mortification  or 
death  of  the  flesh  and  of  the  old  man,  or  of  our  members,  St. 
Paul  means  something  far  different :  He  means  not  that  effi- 
cacy of  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  may  terrify  ns,  but  that 
which  may  sanctify  us,  by  destroying  in  us  that  corrupt  na- 
ture which  brought  forth  fruit  unto  death.  Besides,  we  also 
differ  from  some  persons  on  this  point,  not  with  respect  to 
the  thing  itself,  but  in  the  method  or  form  of  teaching  it, 
that  they  wish  faith  to  be  the  second  part  of  penitence,  but 
we  say  that  ixsmvoja^  [a  change  of  mind  for  the  better,]  by 
which  term  we  understand,  according  to  Scripture  usage,  ren- 
ovation of  life  or  newness  of  living,  is  the  effect  of  faith," 
&c.  {OpusGula.,  tom.  i,  fol.  328.)  Such  are  the  sentiments 
of  Beza ;  but  how  exactly  they  agree  with  those  things  which 
I  have  advanced,  will  be  rendered  very  apparent  to  any  man 
who  will  compare  the  one  with  the  other. 

Consonant  with  these  is  that  which  John  Calvin  says  about 
initial  fear^  in  the  following  words  :  "  They  have  probably 
been  deceived  by  this — that  some  persons  are  tamed  by  the 
qualms  or  terrors  of  conscience,  or  [formantur]  are  prepared 
by  them  for  obedience,  before  they  have  been  imbued  with 
the  knowledge  of  grace,  nay,  before  they  have  tasted  it.  And 
this  is  that  initial  fear  which  some  persons  reckon  among  the 
virtues,  because  they  discern  that  it  approaches  nearly  to  a 
true  and  just  obedience.    But  this  is  not  the  place  for  dis- 


DISSERTATION. 


227 


cussing  the  various  ways  by  which  Christ  draws  us  to  him- 
self, or  prepares  ns  for  the  pursuit  of  piety,"  &c. 

Eut  a  regenerate  man  is  one  who  comprises  within  him- 
self all  tlie  particulars  which  I  shall  here  enumerate :  "  He 
has  put  off  the  old  man  with  his  deeds,  and  has  put  on  the 
new  man,  who  is  renewed  in  knowledge,  which  agrees  with 
the  image  of  him  who  created  him."  (Col.  iii,  9,  10.)  He 
has  received  from  God  "  the  Spirit  of  wisdom  and  revela- 
tion through  the  knowledge  of  Him,  the  eyes  of  his  under- 
standing being  illuminated"  or  opened.  (Ephes.  i,  18.)  He 
has  put  off,  "  concerning  the  former  conversation,  the  old 
man^  which  is  corrupt  according  to  the  deceitful  lusts ;  and 
he  is  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  his  mind,  and  has  put  on  th& 
new  man^  which,  after  God,  is  created  in  righteousness  and 
true  holiness."  (Ephes.  iv,  22-24.)  He,  "with  open  face, 
beholding,  as  in  a  glass,  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  is  changed 
into  the  same  image  from  glory  to  glory,  even  as  by  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord."  (2  Cor.  iii,  18.)  He  is  "  dead  to  sin  ; 
his  old  man  is  crucified  with  Christ,  that  the  body  of  sin 
might  be  destroyed,  that  henceforth  he  should  not  serve  sin ; 
he  is  freed  from  sin,  and  is  alive  unto  God  through  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord."  (Eom.  vi,  2,  6,  7,  11.)  "He  is  crucified 
with  Christ;  nevertheless  he  lives,  yet  not  he;  but  Christ 
liveth  in  him  ;  and  the  life  which  he  now  lives  in  the  flesh, 
he  lives  by  the  faith  of  the  Son  of  God."  (Gal.  ii,  20.)  Be- 
ing one  of  Christ's  followers,  "  he  has  crucified  the  flesh  with 
its  afiections  and  lusts,  and  now  lives  in  the  Spirit."  (v.  24, 
25.)  "  By  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  world  is  crucified  unto 
him,  and  he  unto  the  world."  (vi,  14.)  "In  Christ  Jesus 
the  Lord,  he  is  also  circumcised  with  the  circumcision  made 
without  hands,  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh 
by  the  circumcision  of  Christ."  (Col.  ii,  11.)  "  In  him,  God 
worketh  both  to  will  and  to  do."  (Phil,  ii,  13.)  "  He  is  not 
in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  Spirit ;  the  Spirit  of  Christ  dwelleth 
in  him  ;  through  the  Spirit,  he  mortifies  the  deeds  of  the  body ; 
he  is  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  does  not  walk  after  the 
flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit."  (Eom.  viii,  4,  9,  13,  14.) 

Uniting  in  a  brief  manner,  all  the  parts  and  fruits  of  re- 


t 


228  JAMES  ABMINIUS. 

generation  into  one  summary,  we  say — A  regenerate  man  is 
he  who  has  'a  mind  from  the  darkness  and  vanity  of  the 
world,  and  illuminated  with  the  true  and  saving  Imowledge  of 
Christ,  and  with  faith,  who  has  affections  that  are  mortified, 
and  delivered  from  the  dominion  and  slavery  of  sin,  that  are 
inflamed  with  such  new  desires  as  agree  with  the  divine  na- 
ture, and  as  are  prepared  and  fitted  for  newness  of  living,  who 
has  a  will  reduced  to  order,  and  conformed  to  the  will  of  God, 
who  has  powers  and  faculties  able,  through  the  assistance  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  to  contend  against  sin,  the  world  and  Satan, 
and  to  gain  the  victory  over  them,  and  to  bring  forth  fruit 
unto  God,  such  as  is  meet  for  repentance — who  also  actually 
fights  against  sin,  and,  having  obtained  the  victory  over  it,  no 
longer  does  those  things  which  are  pleasing  to  the  flesh  and 
{concupiscentioe]  to  unlawful  desires,  but  does  those  which  are 
grateful  to  God ;  that  is,  he  actually  [declinat]  desists  from 
evil  and  does  good — not  indeed  perfectly,  but  according  to  the 
measure  of  faith  and  of  the  gift  of  Christ,  according  to  [mod- 
ulo]  the  small  degree  of  regeneration,  which,  begun  in  the 
present  life,  must  be  gradually  improved  or  increased,  till  at 
length  it  is  perfected  after  this  short  life  is  ended — not  with 
respect  to -essential  parts,  but  with  respect  to  quantity,  as  we 
have  already  declared — not  always  without  interruption,  (for 
he  sometimes  stumbles,  falls,  wanders  astray,  commits  sin, 
grieves  the  Holy  Spirit,  &c.,)  but  generally,  and  for  the  most 
part,  he  does  good. 

6.  But  an  unregenerate  man  is,  not  "only  he  Vho  is  entirely 
blind,  ignorant  of  the  will  of  God,  knowingly  and  willingly 
contaminating  himself  by  sins  without  any  remorse  of  con- 
science, affected  with  no  sense  of  the  wrath  of  God,  terrified 
with  no  compunctious  visits  of  conscience,  not  oppressed  with 
the  burden  of  sin,  and  inflamed  with  no  desu-e  of  deliverance 
— ^but  it  is  also  he  who  knows  the  will  of  God  but  does  it  not, 
who  is  acquainted  with  the  way  of  righteousness,  but  departs 
from  it — who  has  the  law  of  God  written  in  his  heart,  and 
has  thoughts  mutually  accusing  and  excusing  each  other — who 
receives  the  word  of  the  gospel  with  gladness,  and  for  a  season 
rejoices  in  its  light — who  comes  to  baptism,  but  either  does 


DISSERTATION. 


229 


not  receive  the  word  itself  in  a  good  heart,  or,  at  least,  does 
not  bring  forth  fruit — who  is  affected  with  a  painful  sense  of 
sin,  is  oppressed  with  its  burden,  and  who  sorrows  after  a  godly 
sort — who  knows  that  righteousness  cannot  be  acquired  by  the 
law,  and  who  is,  therefore,  compelled  to  flee  to  Christ. 

For  all  these  particulars,  in  what  manner  soever  they  be 
taken,  do  not  belong  to  the  essence  and  the  essential  parts  of 
regeneration,  penitence,  or  repentance,  which  are  mortification 
and  vivification  and  quickening ;  but  they  are  only  things 
precediDg,  and  may  have  some  place  among  the  beginnings, 
and,  if  such  be  the  pleasm-e  of  any  one,  they  may  be  reckon- 
ed the  causes  of  penitence  and  regeneration,  as  Calvin  has 
learnedly  and  nervously  explained  them  in  his  Christian  In- 
stitutes. (Lib.  iii,  cap.  3.)  Besides,  even  true  and  living 
faith  in  Christ  precedes  regeneration  strictly  taken,  and  con- 
sisting of  the  mortification  or  death  of  the  old  man,  and  the 
vivification  of  the  new  man,  as  Calvin  has,  in  the  same  pas- 
sage of  his  Institutes^  openly  declared,  and  in  a  manner  which 
agrees  with  the  Scriptm-es  and  the  nature  of  faith.  For  Christ 
becomes  ours  by  faith,  and  we  are  ingrafted  into  Christ,  are 
made  members  of  his  body,  of  his  fiesh  and  of  his  bones,  and, 
being  thus  planted  with  him,  we  coalesce  or  are  united  togeth- 
er, that  we  may  draw  from  him  the  vivifying  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  by  which  power  the  old  man  is  mortified  and  we 
rise  again  into  a  new  life.  All  these  things  cohere  together 
with  each  other  in  a  certain  order,  and  must  thus  also  be  con- 
sidered, if  any  one  be  desirous  of  knowing  them  not  confusedly 
but  distinctly,  and  of  explaining  them  well  to  others.  But 
we  are  not,  in  this  place,  treating  about  all  the  unregenerate 
in  general,  but  only  about  those  in  whom  the  law  has  exerted 
all  its  efficacy,  and  who  are,  on  this  account,  reciprocally  said 
to  be  under  the  law. 


» 


230 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


n.  THE  CONNECTION  OF    THE    SEVENTH   CHAPTER  WITH  THB 

SIXTH. 

1.  The  design  of  the  Apostle  in  the  sixth  chapter.  2.  A  short 
disposition  of  this  argument.  3.  Pour  enunciations  of  it 
4.  This  distribution  is  treated  in  order  [in  the  seventh  chap- 
ter]. 5.  The  two  former  enunciations  are  contained  in  con- 
junction. 6.  What  therefore  is  proved  hy  them.  7.  The 
third  and  fourth  enunciatiom  are  proposed  in  the  fifth  and 
sixth  ve7'ses.  8.  In  the  third  enunciation  lies  the  princijjol 
part  of  the  controversy  /  its  deduction  consists  of  the  prop- 
osition of  the  enunciation  and  of  its  method  of  being  treat- 
ed. 9.  The  proposition  of  the  enunciation.  10.  ThQ  in- 
vestigation of  the  proposition,  consisting  of  a  larger  explan- 
atiou.,  and  the  rendering  of  the  cause.  11.  A  larger  ex- 
planation of  the  seventh  chapter^  from  the  seventh  verse  to 
the  fourteenth.  12.  The  rendering  of  the  cause.,  from  the 
\^,th  verse  to  the  end  of  the  seventh  chapter.  13.  The  four- 
teenth verse  contains  the  r^  ndering  of  a  twofold  reason. 

14.  The  proof  of  this  is  contained  in  the  fifteenth  verse. 

15.  And  a  more  ample  explanation  of  it.  16.  From  which 
two  consectaries  are  deduced — the  first  in  the  sixteenth 
verse.,  and  the  second  in  the  seventeenth.  17.  From  thiSy 
the  apostle  returns  to  the  rendering  of  the  cause^  in  the 
eight etnth  verse.,  and  to  the  proof  of  it.  18.  Its  more  ampU 
explanation  follows  in  the  nineteenth  verse.,  from  which  is 
deduced  the  second  consectary  in  the  twentieth  verse.  19. 
The  conclusion  of  the  thiiig  intended.,  in  the  twenty  fir  si 
verse.,  and  the  proof  of  it  is  given  in  the  twenty -second  and 
twenty-third  verses.  20.  A  votive  exclamation  for  the  de- 
liverance of  a  man  who  is  under  the  law.,  occurs  in  the 
twenty  fourth  verse.  21.  An  answer  or  a  thaiilcs giving  in 
reference  to  that  exclamation.,  is  given  in  the  former  part 
of  the  twenty 'fifth  verse,  and  the  conclusion  of  the  whole 
investigation,  in  which  the  state  of  a  man  who  is  under  the 
law  is  briefly  defined  in  the  latter  part  of  the  twenty- 
fifth  verse,  A  brief  recapitulation  of  the  second 
part. 


DISSERTATION. 


231 


1.  Haying,  from  necessity  of  the  thing  and  of  order,  thus 
premised  these  things,  let  us  now  j^roceed  to  treat  on  the  ques- 
tion and  the  thesis  itself.  But  it  will  be  useful,  briefly  to  place 
before  our  eyes  the  sum  of  the  whole  chapter,  its  disposition 
and  distribution ;  that,  after  having  considered  the  design  of 
the  apostle,  and  those  things  which  conduce  to  that  design, 
and  which  have  been  brought  forward  by  the  apostle  as  sub- 
servient to  his  purpose,  his  mind  and  intention  may  the  more 
plainly  be  made  known  to  us.  That  this  may  the  more  appro- 
priately be  done,  the  matter  must  be  traced  a  little  further 
backward. 

In  the  12th  and  13th  verses,  as  well  as  in  the  preceding 
verses  of  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  the 
apostle  had  exhorted  all  the  believers  at  Eome  to  contend 
strenuously  against  sin,  and  not  to  suffer  sin  to  domineer  or 
rule  over  them,  or  to  exercise  authority  in  their  mortal  body ; 
but  to  devote  themselves  to  God,  and  to  yield  their  members 
as  the  instruments  of  righteousness  unto  God  ;  and  he  dem- 
onstrated and  confirmed  the  equity  of  his  exhortation  by  many 
arguments,  especially  by  those  which  are  deduced  Irom  the 
communion  of  believers  with  Christ.  But,  in  order  to  animate 
them  the  more  powerfully  to  this  spiritual  contest — the  per- 
suasion to  enter  on  which  was  to  be  wrought  not  only  by  a 
demonstration  of  its  equity,  but  also  by  a  promise  of  its  feli- 
citous and  successful  issue — in  the  14th  verse  of  the  same 
chapter,  he  proposed  to  them  the  certain  hope  of  victory,  de- 
claring sin  shall  not  have  dominion  over  you."  For  nothing 
can  so  strongly  incite  men  to  engage  manfully  and  with  spirit 
in  this  warfare,  as  that  certain  confidence  of  obtaining  the 
victory  which  the  apostle  promises  in  these  words.  But  he 
grounds  his  promise,  in  the  14:th  verse,  on  a  reason  drawn 
from  it,  and  on  the  power  and  ability  of  that  [grace]  under 
the  guidance  and  auspices  of  which  they  were  about  to  con- 
tend against  sin,  or  from  that  state  in  which  they  were  then 
placed  in  and  through  Christ,  when  he  says,  "  For  ye  are  not 
under  the  law,  but  under  grace,"  thus  extolling  the  powers  of 
grace  at  the  expense  of  the  contrary  weakness  of  the  law,  as 
though  he  had  said,  "  I  employ  these  continual  exhortations 


232 


JAMES  AEMIOTUS. 


to  induce  you  strenuously  to  engage  in  the  conflict  against 
sin  ;  and  I  do  this,  not  only  because  I  consider  it  most  equit- 
able that  you  should  enter  into  that  warfare,  while  I  have  re- 
gard to  your  communion  with  Christ,  but  also  because  I  arrive 
at  an  assured  hope,  while  I  view  your  present  condition,  that 
you  will  at  length  enjoy  the  victory  over  sin,  through  that  un- 
der whose  auspices  you  fight ;  and  it  can  by  no  means  come 
to  pass,  that  sin  shall  have  dominion  over  you,  as  it  formerly 
had ;  for  you  are  under  grace,  imder  the  government  and 
guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  no  longer  under  the  law. 
If  you  were  still  in  that  state  in  which  you  were  before  faith 
in  Christ,  that  is,  if  you  were  yet  under  the  law,  I  might  in- 
dulge in  despair  about  declaring  a  victory  for  you,  as  placed 
under  the  dominion  of  sin.    Such  a  victory  over  the  power  of 
sin  contending  within  you,  you  would  not  be  able  to  obtain 
by  the  strength  or  power  of  the  law,  which  knows  how  to  com- 
mand, but  affords  no  aid  for  the  performance  of  the  things 
commanded,  how  great  soever  might  be  the  exertions  which 
you  made  to  gain  the  battle  under  the  auspices  of  the  law." 
But  this  reasoning,  in  the  first  place,  possessed  validity  to 
prove  the  necessity  of  the  grace  which  was  offered  and  to  be 
obtained  in  Christ  alone,  in  opposition  to  those  who  were  the 
patrons  of  the  cause  of  the  law  against  the  gospel,  and  who 
urged  that  covenant,  the  law  of  works,  against  the  covenant 
of  grace  and  the  law  of  faith.    This  reasoning  also  contribu- 
ted greatly  to  the  design  which  the  apostle  proposed  to  him- 
self in  the  principal  part  of  this  epistle.    His  design  was  to 
teach  that,  not  the  law,  but  "  the  gospel  is  the  power  of  God 
to  salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth,"  both  because  by  the 
law,  and  by  the  works  of  the  law,  no  man  can  be  justified 
from  the  sins  which  he  has  committed,  and  because,  by  the 
power  and  aid  of  the  same  law,  no  one  can  oppose  himself 
to  the  power  of  sin  to  shake  off  its  yoke,  and,  after  having 
been  freed  from  its  yoke,  to  serve  God,  since  he  immediately 
falls  in  the  conflict.    But  in  Christ  Jesus,  as  he  is  offered  to 
us  through  the  gospel,  and  apprehended  by  faith,  we  can 
obtain  both  these  blessings — the  forgiveness  of  sins  through 
faith  in  his  blood,  and  the  power  of  the  Spirit  of  Christy  by 


DISSERTATION. 


233 


wMch,  being  delivered  from  the  dominion  of  sin,  we  may, 
through  the  same  Spirit,  be  able  to  resist  sin,  to  gain  the 
victory  over  it,  and  to  serve  God  "  in  newness  of  life." 

These  things  in  the  sixth  chapter  may  be  perceived  at 
one  glance,  when  placed  before  the  eyes  in  the  following 
order : 

THE  PKOPOSmON  OF  THE  APOSTLE. 

Dehortatory. — "  i^either  yield  ye  your  members  as  instru- 
ments of  unrighteousness  unto  sin." 

Hortatory. — "But  yield  your  members  as  instruments  of 
righteousness  unto  God." 

THE  REASON. 

"  For  sin  shall  not  have  dominion  over  you." 

HENCE,  AN  ENTHTMEME,  WHOSE 

Antecedent  is — "  Sin  shall  not  have  dominion  over  you." 

Its  consequent — "  Therefore,  neither  yield  your  members  as 
instruments  of  unrighteousness  unto  sin,  but  yield  yom'selves 
unto  God,"  &c. 

THE  PROOF  OF  THE  ANTECEDENT  OR  OF  THE  REASON. 

"  For  ye  are  under  grace  ;  therefore,  sin  shall  not  have  do- 
minion over  you." 

AN  ILLUSTRATION  CF  THE  PROOF  FROM  IIS  CONTRARY. 

"  For  ye  are  not  under  the  law." 

A  BRIEF  EXPLICATION  OF  THE  PROOF,  AND  OF  IIS  ILLUSTRATION. 


"  If,  indeed,  you  were  yet  under  the  law,  as  you  formerly 
were,  sin  would  have  the  dominion  over  you  as  it  once  had ; 
16  TOL.  n. 


234 


JAMES  AEMINTrS. 


and,  Laying  followed  its  commands  and  impnlses,  yon  would 
not  be  able  to  do  any  other  than  yield  your  members  as  in- 
struments of  unrighteousness  unto  sin. 

"  But  as  you  are  now  no  longer  under  the  law,  but  under 
grace,  sin  shall  not  in  any  wise  have  the  dominion  over  you, 
but  by  the  power  of  grace  you  shall  easily  resist  sin,  and  yield 
your  members  as  instruments  of  righteousness  unto  God." 

^  From  the  14:th  vei'se,  the  apostle  perseyeres  in  the  same 
exhortation  throughout  the  remainder  of  the  sixth  chapter, 
with  a  slight  intermission  of  tliis  argument,  yet  having  previ- 
ously refuted  the  objection  which  might  be  deduced  from  it ; 
being  about  to  resume  the  same  argument,  and  to  treat  it 
more  at  large,  in  the  whole  of  the  seventh  chapter,  and  in  the 
former  part  of  the  eighth,  since,  as  we  have  already  perceived, 
the  prosecution  of  this  argument  contributes  very  materially 
to  his  design. 

2.  But  the  apostle  treats  this  subject  in  the  order  and  meth- 
od which  was  demanded  by  reason  itself,  and  by  the  necessity 
of  its  discussion.  For  he  had  said,  "  Sin  shall  not  have  do- 
minion over  you,  for  ye  are  not  under  the  law,  but  under 
grace.'' 

3.  In  these  words,  are  contained  the  four  following  enunci- 
ations : 

(1.)  Christians  are  not  under  the  law. 
(2.)  Christians  are  under  grace. 

(3.)  Sin  shall  have  dominion  over  those  who  are  under 
the  law. 

(4.)  Sin  shall  not  have  dominion  over  those  who  are  under 
grace. 

Of  these  four  enunciations,  the  second  and  the  fourth  are 
necessaiy  and  sufficient  to  j)ei-suade  in  favor  of  this  exhorta- 
tion ;  but  the  fii^st  and  the  third  are  adduced,  both  for  the  sake 
of  illustration,  and  because  they  were  required  by  the  principal 
design  of  the  entire  epistle.  The  foiTuer  of  these  [pairs  of 
conjoint  enunciations]  is  well  known  to  all  who  understand 
the  nature  of  a  separated  axiom  and  the  mutual  relation  which 
exists  between  its  parts ;  but  the  latter  of  them  will  be  ren- 


DISSERTATION. 


235 


dered  very  apparent  by  the  deduction  of  the  epistle  itself,  and 
on  a  diligent  inspection  of  its  conformation. 

4.  The  apostle,  therefore,  thought  that  these  four  axioms 
ought  to  be  treated  by  him  in  order,  and  indeed  always  with 
the  mention  of  the  conclusion  which  he  was  desirous  to  infer 
from  them  as  from  premises  ;  and  in  which  the  sum  of  the  ex- 
hortation consisted. 

5.  But  the  apostle  treats  those  two  former  enunciations  con- 
jointly, such  a  course  being  required  by  their  nature.  For  he 
gives  one  thing  to  those  from  which  he  takes  another  away^ 
and  this  very  properly  ;  because  there  exists  one  and  the  same 
cause  why  the  one  should  be  attributed  and  the  other  taken 
away,  why  they  are  under  grace  and  not  under  the  law.  This 
cause  is  expressed  in  the  fourth  verse  of  the  seventh  chapter, 
in  the  following  words  :  "  Ye,  also,  are  become  dead  to  the  law 
in  the  body  of  Christ,  that  ye  should  be  married  to  another." 

6.  But  in  the  first  four  verses,  the  apostle  proves  that  Chris- 
tians or  believers  are  not  under  the  law,  but  under  grace ; 
which  proof  may  be  comprised  in  this  syllogism  : 

They  who  are  dead  to  the  law,  and  this  in  the  body  of 
Christ,  that  they  may  be  married  to  another,  even  to  Christ, 
are  no  longer  under  the  law,  but  are  now  under  grace ; 

But  Christians  are  dead  to  the  law,  that  they  should  be 
married  to  another,  even  to  Christ ; 

Therefore,  Christians  are  no  longer  under  the  law,  but  un- 
der grace. 

The  first  part  of  the  proposition — "They  who  are  dead  to 
the  law,  are  no  longer  under  the  law,"  is  expressed  in  the  first 
verse  of  the  seventh  chapter  in  these  words  :  "The  law  hath 
dominion  over  a  man  as  long  as  he  liveth."  The  latter  part 
ot  it,  "  They  who  are  made  Christ's  are  under  grace," — is  in- 
cluded in  the  fourth  verse,  from  which  it  may  be  deduced. 
But  a  confirmation  of  the  first  part  of  the  proposition  is  added, 
in  the  first  verse,  from  the  testimonj^  of  the  consciences  of 
those  who  are  expert  in  the  knowledge  of  the  law ;  and  the 
same  part  of  the  proposition  is  illustrated,  in  the  second  and 
third  verses,  by  a  simile,  that  of  marriage,  in  which  the  woman 
is  no  longer  liable  to  the  law  of  her  husband  than  "  so  long  as 


236 


JAMES  AKMINITS. 


he  liveth  but  when  he  is  dead,  she  is  free  from  the  law  of 
her  husband,  so  that  she  may  be  allowed  to  transfer  herself  to 
another  man  without  committing  the  crime  of  adultery.  The 
application  of  this  comparison  is  evident,  the  difference  only 
being  observed,  that  the  apostle  has  declared,  by  a  change  in 
the  mode  of  speaking,  that  Christians  are  become  dead  to  the 
law^  and  not  that  the  law  is  become  dead  to  them.  This 
change  of  speech  is  attributed  by  some  persons  to  the  pru- 
dence of  the  apostle,  who  wished  to  avoid  the  use  of  a  phrase 
which  he  previously  knew  would  be  offensive  to  the  Jews. 
By  others  it  is  transferred  to  the  nature  of  the  thing,  in  which 
they  say  that  sin^  and  not  the  law^  sustained  the  part  or  person 
of  the  husband,  because  in  the  sixth  verse  sin  is  said  to  be  dead ; 
but  this  makes  nothing  to  our  present  purpose. 

'The  assumption,  in  the  fourth  verse,  is  in  these  words  :  "  Ye 
also  are  become  dead  to  the  law  in  the  body  of  Christ,  that  ye 
should  be  married  to  another,  even  to  Christ."  This  assump- 
tion is  illustrated,  first,  by  the  efficient  cause  of  that  mortifi- 
cation or  death,  which  is  the  crucifixion  and  the  resurrection 
of  the  body  of  Christ,  and  the  communion  of  believers  with 
Christ  in  that  crucifixion  and  in  the  raising  again  of  his  body. 
Secondly.  This  assumption  is  illustrated  by  the  final  cause  of 
deliverance,  which  contains  the  scope  or  design  of  the  apos- 
tolical exhortation,  that  is,  "to  bring  forth  fruit  unto  God." 
But  he  perseveres  in  the  same  end  in  the  two  subsequent  ver- 
ses, the  sixth  and  seventh,  by  treating  it  through  a  compari- 
son of. things  similar,  as  he  had  also  done  in  the  nineteenth 
verse  of  the  sixth  chapter.  The  parallel  is,  that  we  serve  God^ 
and  since  we  are  not  now  in  the  oldness  of  the  letter^  hut  in 
the  newness  of  Spirit^  and  are  delivered  from  the  law^  that 
thing  being  dead  in  which  we  were  held^  it  is  equitable  that 
we  bring  forth  fruit  unto  God j  because  when  we  were  in  the 
fleshy  the  motion  of  sins,  existing  through  the  law,  did  work 
in  OUT  members  to  bring  forth  fruit  unto  death. 

The  conclusion  is  not  openly  inferred,  but  is  understood, 
which  is  a  mode  of  frequent  occurrence,  because  the  proposi- 
tion, or  question  to  be  treated,  does  not  differ  from  the  conclu  - 
sion in  the  matter,  but  only  in  the  mode  of  position. 


DISSERTATION. 


237 


7.  But  though  these  two  verses,  the  fifth  and  sixth,  have 
such  a  relation  to  those  things  which  preceded  as  has  been  al- 
ready explained,  yet  thej  are  likewise  to  be  referred  to  those 
which  follow.  For  the  third  and  fourth  enunciations  are  pro- 
posed in  these  two  verses — -the  third  in  the  fifth  verse,  and  the 
fourth  in  the  sixth.  For,  this  expression,  "  The  motions  of  sins, 
which  are  by  the  law,  are  vigorous,  or  operate  in  the  members 
of  men  who  are  yet  in  the  flesh,"  (verse  fifth,)  is  tantamount 
in  meaning  to  these  words  :  Sin  has  the  dominion  over  those 
who  are  under  the  law."  These  words  likewise,  "  But  now 
we  are  delivered  from  the  law,  that  being  dead  wherein  we 
were  held,  (^ss^  so  that  we  should  serve  in  newness  of  spirit, 
and  not  in  the  oldness  of  the  letter,"  (verse  sixth,)  agree  well 
with  the  following  :  "  Sin  shall  not  have  the  dominion  over 
those  who  are  under  grace."  This  will  be  rendered  evident  if 
any  one  translates  the  ]3article  wcs,  as  an  ancient  interpreter  has 
done,  by  the  words  "  so  that,"  and  understands  it  not  of  the 
end  or  intention,  but  of  the  issue  or  event,  as  the  almost  per- 
petual use  of  that  particle  requires.  For  the  sense  is  this : 
"  When  we  were  yet  in  the  oldness  of  the  letter  and  under  the 
law,  then  we  were  held  under  sin  ;  and  when  we  are  now  de- 
livered from  the  law  and  placed  in  newness  of  spirit,  we  are 
able  to  serve  God  in  righteousness  and  true  holiness,"  agreea- 
bly to  this  state  of  our  newness  of  living. 

8.  But  let  us  now  more  closely  inspect  how  this  third  enun- 
ciation is  treated,  since  in  it  is  laid  the  principal  part  of  the 
controversy.  The  exposition  of  the  whole  matter  consists  of 
the  proposing  of  the  enunciation,  and  of  its  investigation,  the 
latter  of  which  is  partly  an  exjplanation^  and  partly  an  appli- 
cation of  the  cause.  Both  of  these  are  briefly  joined  to  the 
proposition,  as  it  is  laid  down  in  the  fifth  verse  of  this  chapter ; 
wherefore  they  are  more  copious,  and  better  accommodated  to 
the  more  prolix  investigation,  than  as  they  are  proposed  from 
the  fourteenth  verse  of  the  sixth  chapter. 

9.  (I.)  For  that  proposition  is,  "  sin,"  or,  as  it  is  more  en- 
ergetically exi)ressed,  "  The  motions  of  sins  have  the  dominion 
over  those  who  are  under  the  law."    This  attribute  is  likewise 


238 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


more  nervously  expressed  by  this  metliocl  of  speech,  by  which 
the  motions  of  sins  are  said  to  have  existence  b}^  the  law  itself. 

Two  effects  of  this  dominion,  therefore,  are  added  to  the 
proposition  for  the  sake  of  explication.  One  is,  its  vigor ^  and 
its  worhbig  in  the  members  /  the  other  is,  its  bringing  forth 
fruits  unto  death.  The  cause  wh}^,  in  men  under  the  law, 
"  the  motions  of  sins  w^ork  in  their  members  to  bring  forth 
fruit  unto  death,"  is  rendered  in  these  words,  "when  w^e  were 
in  the  flesh."  For  the  reference  to  the  time  preceding  is  taken 
from  the  carnal  state,  w^hich  state  comprises  the  cause  why,  in 
times  past,  "  the  motions  of  sins  did  work  in  our  members." 
As  if  the  apostle  had  said,  "  It  is  not  wonderful  that  the  mo- 
tions of  sins  have  had  the  dominion  over  us,  and  have  worked 
in  our  members  to  bring  forth  fruit  unto  deith ;  for  we  are  in 
the  flesh ;  and  the  law  itself  is  so  far  from  being  able  to  hin- 
der this  dominion  and  to  restrain  the  vigorous  growth  of  sin, 
that  these  motions  are  by  the  law  far  more  fervid  and  vehe- 
ment, not  through  the  fault  of  the  law,  but  through  the  wick- 
edness and  obstinacy  of  sin  that  holds  the  dominion  and  abu- 
ses its  power." 

10.  (2.)  This  proposition,  therefore,  is  more  largely  ex- 
plained, from  the  seventh  verse  to  the  fourteenth  ;  and  its 
cause  is  fully  treated  from  the  fourteenth  verse  inclusive,  to 
the  end  of  the  chapter.  The  explanation  is  occupied  about 
this  two-fold  effect — the  working  of  sin^  and  its  fructification 
by  which  it  brings  forth  fruit  unto  death.  The  rendering  of 
the  cause  is  continually  intent  upon  what  is  said  in  the  fifth 
verse,  "  When  we  were  in  the  fleshP  But  on  both  these 
points,  we  must  carefully  guard  against  bringing  the  law  un- 
der the  suspicion  of  blame,  as  though  it  were  of  itself  the 
cause  of  depraved  desires  in  us,  and  of  death  ;  when  it  is  only 
the  occasion,  upon  which  sin  violently  seizes,  and  uses  it  to 
produce  these  effects  in  men  who  live  under  the  law.  In  the 
explanation,  both  these  effects  are  removed  from  the  law,  and 
they  are  attributed  to  sin  as  to  their  proper  cause ;  yet  this  is 
done  in  such  a  way,  that  it  is  at  the  same  time  added,  that 
sin  abuses  the  law  to  produce  these  effects. 


DISSERTATION". 


239 


11.  (i.)  The  former  of  these  effects  is  removed  from  the 
law,  in  the  seventh  verse,  by  these  words  :  "  What  shall  we 
say  then  ?  Is  the  law  sin  ?  God  forbid."  That  is,  as  if  he 
had  said,  "  Can  it,  therefore,  be  attributed  to  the  law  that  it 
is  itself,  or  the  cause  of  depraved  desires  in  ns,  because  it  is 
called  in  the  fifth  verse,  the  motions  of  sin  which  are  hy 
the  lawf^  The  apostle  replies,  that  it  is  very  wrong  to  en- 
tertain even  the  bare  thought  of  such  a  thing  concerning  the 
law.  He  subjoins  a  proof  of  this  removal  of  the  first  effect, 
from  the  contrary  effect  which  the  law  has  ;  for  the  laio  is  the 
index  of  sin,  or  tha  which  j)oi?its  it  out;  therefore,  it  is  nei- 
ther sin  nor  the  cause  of  sin.  He  then  illustrates  this  proof 
by  a  special  example  :  "  For  I  should  not  have  known  concu- 
piscence, unless  the  law  had  said,  Thou  shalt  not  desire  or 
covet.^^ 

But  the  same  effect  is,  in  the  eighth  verse,  attributed  to  sin, 
in  these  words  :  "  But  sin  wrought  in  me  all  manner  of  con- 
cupiscence," yet  so  that  it  abuses  the  law  as  an  occasion  to 
produce  this  effect.  This  is  intimated  in  the  words  which  im- 
mediately follow:  "Sin,  taking  occasion  by  the  command- 
ment, wrought  in  me,"  &c.  The  latter  effect  [the  fructifica- 
tion of  sin]  is  proved  in  the  next  verse,  in  these  words  :  "  For, 
without  the  law,  sin  was  dead ;  but,  on  the  approach  of  the 
law,  sin  revived,"  which  is  illustrated  by  its  opposite  priva- 
tives,  "  For  I  was  alive  when  sin  was  dead  ;  but  when  sin  re- 
vived then  I  died ;"  but,  as  this  was  done  by  the  law,  it  is  ev- 
ident that  sin  abused  the  law  to  produce  this  effect.  But  the 
apostle  here  joins  the  second  effect  to  the  first,  (because  they 
cohere  together  by  nature,  and  the  former  is  the  cause  of  the 
latter,)  and  thus  in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  verses,  ascribes 
death  to  sin,  which  abuses  the  law,  yet  so  as  to  excuse  the  law 
also  from  the  effect  of  death,  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  tenth 
verse,  "  the  commandment  which  was  unto  life ;"  the  cause 
of  death  being  transferred  to  sin,  in  the  expression,  "  For  sin, 
taking  occasion  by  the  commandment,"  &c.  But  he  follows 
up  his  exculpation  of  the  law,  in  the  twelfth  verse,  by  a  de- 
scription of  the  nature  of  the  law,  that  it  "is  holy,  and  just, 
and  good,"  and,  therefore,  by  no  means  the  cause  of  death — • 


240 


JAMES  ARMmiUS. 


an  insinuation  against  the  law  which  he  indignantly  repels  in 
the  former  part  of  the  thirteenth  verse,  by  saying,  "  God  for- 
bid that  that  which  is  good,  should  be  made  death  unto  me." 
But  in  the  latter  part  of  this  verse,  he  ascribes  the  same  effect 
to  sin,  with  the  addition  of  a  two-fold  end,  both  of  them  incli- 
ning to  the  disparagement  of  sin  itself,  in  these  words :  "That 
sin  might  appear  sin,  working  death  in  me  by  that  which  is 
good  ;  that  sin,  by  the  commandment,  might  become  exceed- 
ingly sinful."  As  though  he  had  said — "  Sin,  by  this  abuse 
of  the  law  to  seduce  and  kill  us,  has  produced  the  effect,  that, 
in  return,  its  own  depravity  and  perverseness  be  made  mani- 
fest by  the  law.  This  perverse  depravity  consists  in  sin  work- 
ing death  by  the  law  which  is  good,  and  in  being  made  ex- 
ceedingly sinful  by  the  commandment  which  is  just  and  holy, 
and  that  it  might  only  become  as  it  were  a  sinner  above  meas- 
ure by  its  own  [malitici]  wickedness,  but  also  might  be  de- 
clared to  be  such  by  the  indication  of  the  law,  which  it  has  so 
shamefully  abused  to  produce  these  effects."  But  it  is  appa- 
rent from  the  whole  of  this  explanation,  that  the  apostle  has 
so  attempered  his  style  as  to  draw  a  conclusion  of  the  necessity 
of  the  grace  of  Christ,  from  the  efficacy  of  sin,  and  from  the 
weakness  of  the  law.  This  will  be  still  more  perspicuous,  if 
we  briefly  comprise  this  explanation  of  the  apostle  in  the  fol- 
lowing form :  "  Sin  has  the  dominion  over  those  who  are  un- 
der the  law,  by  working  in  them  all  manner  of  concupiscence 
through  the  law  itself,  and  also  by  killing  them  through  it, 
yet  so  that  the  law  is  free  [utraque  culpa]  from  all  blame  in 
both  cases,  since  it  is  holy  and  good,  the  index  of  sin,  and  was 
given  for  life.  But  sin  is  so  powerful  in  men  who  are  still 
under  the  law,  that  it  abuses  the  law  to  produce  those  effects 
in  a  man  who  is  under  subjection  to  it ;  by  which  abuse  of 
the  law,  sin,  on  the  other  hand,  takes  away  the  reward  from 
the  law,  that  its  own  perverse  and  noxious  disposition  and  ten- 
dency may  be  manifested  [indicio]  by  the  indication  of  the 
law.  From  these  circumstances  a  man  who  is  under  the  law 
is  compelled  to  flee  to  grace,  that  he  may  by  its  benificent  aid 
be  delivered  from  the  tyranny  of  such  a  wicked  and  injurious 
master." 


DISSERTATION. 


241 


12.  (ii.)  The  rendering  of  the  cause  follows  from  the  four- 
teenth verse  to  the  end  of  the  chapter ;  in  which,  as  we  have 
already  observed,  the  utmost  care  is  evinced  not  to  im230se  any 
ignominy  on  the  law,  or  to  ascribe  any  blame  to  it ;  and  the 
entire  [noxa]  mischief  is  attributed  to  the  power  of  sin  and  to 
the  weakness  of  that  man  who  is  under  the  law.  But  the  cause 
is  briefly  given  in  the  fourteenth  verse,  in  these  words  :  "For 
we  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual ;  but  I  am  carnal,  sold  un- 
der sin."  But  in  order  that  this  rendering  of  the  cause  may 
be  accurately  understood,  we  must  again  consider  that  propo- 
sition, the  cause  of  which  the  apostle  determines  in  this  place 
to  explain,  and  which  is  this  :  "Sin  has  dominion  over  those 
who  are  under  the  law  or,  "  The  motions  of  sins,  which  are 
by  the  law,  work  in  men  who  are  under  the  law." 

13.  That  the  cause  of  this  may  be  fully  and  perfectly  ren- 
dered, it  must  be  shewn  why  the  law  cannot  weaken  the  force 
and  tyranny  of  sin  in  those  who  are  under  the  law,  and  why 
sin  holds  those  who  are  under  the  law  bound  and  obnoxious 
to  itself  as  by  some  right  of  its  own.  Therefore,  this  render- 
ing of  the  cause  consists  of  two  parts  :  The  fiest  is  contained 
in  these  words  :  "  For  truly  the  law  is  spiritual ;  but  I  am 
carnal."  That  the  particle  "  indeed''''  or  "  truly'''  must  be 
added,  is  proved  both  by  its  relative  (^s,  "  Jw^,"  as  well  as  by 
the  very  subject.  The  second  is  contained  in  these  words : 
"  For  I  am  sold  under  sin  ;"  that  is,  I  am  under  the  dominion 
of  sin,  as  one  who  is  constituted  a  purchased  servant  by  the 
right  of  sale,  and  like  one  who  becomes  the  bond-slave  of  sin. 
As  though  the  apostle  had  said,  "That  the  law  is  incapable 
of  hindering  \yigorem\  the  strength  and  operation  of  sin  in 
men  who  are  under  the  law,  arises  from  this,  that  men  under 
the  law  are  carnal ;  in  whom  therefore  the  law,  though  it  is 
spiritual,  does  not  possess  so  much  power  as  to  enable  it  to 
restrain  the  strong  inclination  of  the  flesh  to  things  which  are 
evil  and  contrary  to  the  law.  And  since  sin,  by  a  certain 
right  of  its  own,  exercises  dominion  over  those  men  who  are 
under  the  law,  therefore  it  comes  to  pass  that  they  have  been 
made  bond-slaves  to  sin,  and  are  bound  and  "  fettered  like  a 
purchased  menial." 


U2 


JAMES  AiJMINnJS. 


14.  The  apostle  immediately  subjoins  a  proof,  in  the 
fifteenth  verse,  not  so  much  of  the  fact  that  a  man  under  the 
law  is  car7ial^  as  that  he  is  the  slave  of  sin.  But  the  proof  is 
taken  from  the  peculiar  adjunct  or  effect  of  a  purchased  ser- 
vant, in  these  words  :  "  For  that  which  do  I  allow  not." 
For  a  servant  does  not  do  that  which  seems  good  to  himself, 
but  that  which  his  master  is  pleased  to  prescribe  to  him  ;  be- 
cause thus  is  the  word  [agnosco]  "I  allow"  used  in  this 
passage,  for  "  I  approve."  Bat  if  any  one  thinks  that  it  is 
here  used  in  its  proper  signification,  the  argument  will  be  the 
same,  and  equal  its  validity;  ''for,"  as  Christ  has  told  us, 
"  the  servant  knoweth  not  what  his  Lord  doeth  ;"  (J ohn  xv, 
15 ;)  neither  is  his  Lord  bound,  nor  is  he  accustomed,  to 
make  known  to  his  servant  all  his  will,  except  so  far  as  it 
seems  proper  to  himself  to  employ  the  services  of  his  menial 
through  the  knowledge  of  that  will. 

15.  But  the  first  signification  of  the  word  is  better  accommo- 
dated to  this  passage,  and  seems  to  be  required  by  those  things 
which  follow  ;  for  a  more  ample  explanation  of  this  argument 
is  produced  in  the  following  words  :  "  For  what  I  would,  that 
do  I  not;  but  what  I  hate,  that  do  I;"  which  is  an  evident 
token  of  a  will  that  is  subjugated,  and  subject  to  the  will  of 
another ;  that  is,  to  the  will  of  sin.  Therefore  he  is  the  ser- 
vant and  the  slave  of  sin. 

16.  The  apostle  now  deduces  two  consectaries  from  this,  by 
the  first  of  which  he  excuses  the  law,  and  by  the  second,  he 
throws  on  sin  all  the  blame  respecting  this  matter,  as  he  had 
also  done  in  a  previous  part  of  the  chapter.  The  first  consec- 
tary  is,  if,  then,  I  do  that  which  I  would  not,  I  consent  unto 
the  law  that  it  is  good."  (16.)  That  is,  "  if  I  unwillingly  do 
that  which  sin  prescribes  to  me,  now,  indeed,  I  consent  unto 
the  law  that  it  is  good,  as  being  that  against  which  sin  is 
committed.  I  assent  to  the  law  that  commands,  though,  while 
placed  under  the  dominion  of  sin,  I  am  unable  to  perform 
what  it  prescribes."  The  second  consectary  is,  "  ]N"ow  then  it 
is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me."  (17.) 
That  is,  "  therefore,  because  I  reluctantly  do  what  I  do,  not  at 
my  own  option  but  at  that  of  another,  that  is,  of  my  master, 


DISSERTATION. 


243 


who  is  sin  ;  it  follows  from  this,  that  it  is  not  I  who  do  it,  but 
sin  which  dwells  in  me,  has  the  dominion  over  me,  and  impels 
me  to  do  it." 

IT.  Having  treated  upon  these  subjects  in  the  manner  now 
stated,  the  apostle  returns  to  the  same  rendering  of  the  cause 
and  the  proof  of  it.  The  eighteenth  verse  contains  the  render- 
ing of  the  cause,  in  these  words  :  "  For  I  know  that  in  me 
(that  is,  in  my  flesh)  dwelleth  no  good  thing  :"  Wherefore  it 
is  not  surprising  that  the  law,  though  it  be  spiritual,  is  not 
able  to  break  the  power  of  sin  in  a  man  w^ho  is  under  the  law; 
for  that  which  is  good  does  not  dwell,  that  is,  has  not  the  do- 
minion, in  a  carnal  man  who  is  under  the  law.  The  ^^roof  of 
this  is  subjoined  in  the  same  verse  :  "  For  to  will  is  present 
with  me ;  but  how  to  perform  that  which  is  good  I  find  not." 
Or,  "  I  do  not  find  how  I  can  perform  any  thing  good." 

18.  The  more  ample  explanation  of  it  is  given  in  the 
nineteenth  verse,  "  For  the  good  that  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but 
the  evil  that  I  would  not,  that  I  do ;"  which  is  an  evident 
token  that  no  good  thing  dwelleth  in  my  flesh.  For  if  any 
good  thing  dwelt  in  my  flesh,  I  should  then  be  actually  capa- 
ble of  performing  that  to  which  my  mind  and  will  are 
inclined.  He  then  deduces  once  more  the  second  consectar}^, 
in  the  twentieth  verse  :  "  'Now  if  I  do  that  I  would  not,  it  is 
no  more  I  that  do  it.  bnt  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me." 

19.  But  from  all  these  arguments,  in  the  twenty-first  verse 
he  concludes  the  thing  intended  :  "  I  find  then  a  law,  [which 
is  imposed  in  this  way,]  that,  when  I  would  do  good,  evil  is 
present  with  me."  That  is.  In  reality,  therefore,  I  find  from 
the  circumstance  of  "  to  will  being  present  with  me,"  but  of 
not  being  capable  of  performing  what  is  good,  that  evil  or  sin 
is  present  with  me,  and  not  only  has  it  a  place  in  me  but  it 
likewise  prevails.  This  conclusion  does  not  difier  in  meaning 
from  the  rendering  of  the  cause  which  is  comprised  in  the 
fourteenth  verse,  in  this  expression  :  "  But  I  am  carnal,  sold 
under  sin."  But  in  the  two  subsequent  verses,  the  twenty - 
second  and  twenty-third,  the  apostle  proves  the  conclusion 
which  immediately  preceded ;  and,  in  proving  it,  he  more 
clearly  explains  whence  and  how  it  happens,  that  a  man  who 


JAMES  ARMTCnUS. 


is  under  the  law  cannot  have  dominion  over  sin,  and  that, 
whether  willing  or  nnwilling,  such  a  person  is  compelled  to 
fulfill  the  lusts  of  sin  ;  and  he  says,  "  for  I  delight  in  the  law 
of  God  after  the  inward  man  ;  but  I  see  another  law  in  my 
members,  warring  against  the  law  of  my  mind,  and  bringing 
me  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  my  members." 

20.  At  the  close,  from  a  consideration  of  the  miserable  state 
of  those  men  who  are  under  the  law,  a  votive  exclamation  is 
raised  for  their  deliverance  from  this  tyranny  and  servitude  of 
sin,  in  the  following  terms  :  "O  wretched  man  that  I  am! 
who  shall  deliver  (or  snatch)  me  from  the  body  of  this  death  ?" 
That  is,  not  from  this  mortal  body,  but  from  the  dominion  of 
sin,  which  ne  here  calls  the  body  of  death^  as  he  calls  it  also 
in  other  passages  the  hody  of  sin. 

21.  To  this  exclamation  he  subjoins  a  reply — "  the  grace  of 
God,  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,  will  deliver  thee" — or  a 
thanksgiving,  in  which  the  apostle  [sigjiijicat']  intimates,  in 
his  own  person,  whence  deliverance  must  be  sought  and  ex- 
pected. In  the  last  place,  a  conclusion  is  annexed  to  the  whole 
investigation,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  twenty-fifth  verse,  in 
which  is  briefiy  defined  the  entire  condition  of  a  man  under 
the  law,  that  had  been  previously  and  at  great  length  de- 
scribed ;  "  so  then,  with  the  mind,  I  myself,  serve  the  law  of 
God,  but  with  the  flesh,  the  law  of  sin."  And  in  this  manner 
is  concluded  the  seventh  chapter. 

22.  But  in  order  that  these  arguments,  after  having  been 
reduced  to  a  small  compass,  may  be  perceived  at  a  single 
glance,  let  us  briefly  recapitulate  this  second  part  likewise,  in 
the  following  manner ; 

"We  have  already  declared,  that  sin  has  dominion  over 
those  men  who  are  under  the  law :  But  the  cause  of  this  is, 
that,  though  the  law  itself  is  spiritual,  and  though  the  men  who 
are  under  it  consent  unto  it  that  it  is  good,  and  though  they 
will  what  is  good  and  delight  in  the  law  of  God  after  the  in- 
ward man ;  yet  these  very  men  who  are  under  the  law  are 
carnal,  sold  under  sin,  have  no  good  thing  dwelling  in  their 
flesh,  but  have  sin  dwelling  in  them,  and  evil  is  present  with 
them ;  they  have  likewise  a  law  in  their  members  which  not 


DISSERTATION. 


245 


only  wars  against  the  law  of  their  mind,  but  which  also  renders 
them  captives  to  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  their  members. 
Of  this  matter  it  is  a  certain  and  evident  token,  that  the  ffood 
which  such  men  would,  they  do  not;  but  the  evil  which  they 
hate,  that  they  do  ;  and  that  when  they  will  to  do  good,  they 
do  not  obtain  [posse]  the  ability.  Hence  it  is  undoubtedly 
evident,  that  they  are  not  themselves  the  masters  of  their  own 
acts,  but  sin  which  dwelleth  in  them ;  to  which  is  also  chiefly 
to  be  ascribed  the  culpability  of  the  evil  which  is  committed 
by  these  men  who  are  like  the  reluctant  perpetrators  of  it.  But 
[hi?ic]  on  this  account,  these  persons,  from  the  shewing  of  the 
law,  having  become  acquainted  with  their  misery,  are  com- 
pelled to  cry  out,  and  to  implore  the  grace  of  Jesus  Christ." 


YERSE  THE  FOURTEENTH. 

1.  A  CLOSER  investigation  of  this  question  and  a  demonstra- 
tion taken  from  the  text  itself^  that  the  apostle  is  here 
treating  about  a  man  i^laced  under  the  law^  and  not  under 
grace.  2.  The  manner  in  which  carnal  and  spititual  are 
opposed  to  each  other  in  the  Scriptures.  3.  An  objection 
taken  from  1  Cor.  iii,  1,  2  ;  and  a  reply  to  it.  4.  The 
meaning  of  the  phrase.^  sold  under  sin.  The  views  of 
Calvin  and  Beza  on  this  verse. 

1.  Having,  in  the  preceding  manner,  considered  the  dispo- 
sition and  economy  of  the  whole  chapter,  let  us  now  somewhat 
more  strictly  investigate  the  question  proposed  by  us,  which 
is  this  :  "  Are  those  thins^s  which  are  recorded,  from  the  four- 
teenth  verse  to  the  end  of  the  seventh  chapter,  to  be  under- 
stood concerning  a  man  who  is  under  the  law,  or  concerning 
one  who  is  under  grace  V 

First  of  all,  let  some  attention  be  bestowed  on  the  connec- 
tion of  the  fourteenth  verse  with  those  which  preceded  it ;  for 
the  rational  particle  /ap,  '^for^''  indicates  its  connection  with 
the  preceding.    This  connection  shows,  that  the  same  subject 


246 


JAMES  AHMmiUS. 


is  discussed  in  this  verse,  as  in  those  before  it;  and  the  pro- 
nonn  ^/w,  I,  must  be  understood  as  relating  to  the  same  man, 
as  had  been  signified  in  the  previous  verses  by  the  same 
pronoun.  But  the  investigation  in  the  former  part  of  the 
chapter  was  respecting  a  man  who  is  under  the  law,  and  the 
pronoun  "  I"  had  previously  denoted  the  man  who  was  under 
the  law  :  Therefore,  in  this  fourteenth  verse  also,  in  which  a 
cause  is  given  of  that  which  had  been  before  explained,  a  man 
under  the  law  is  still  the  subject.  If  it  be  otherwise,  the 
whole  of  it  is  nothing  less  than  loose  reasoning ;  nor,  in  this 
case,  have  we  ever  been  able  to  perceive  even  any  probable 
coDuection,  according  to  which  these  consequences  that  follow 
can  be  in  coherence  with  the  matters  preceding,  and  which  has 
been  adduced  by  those  who  suppose  that,  in  the  first  thirteen 
verses  of  this  seventh  cliapter,  tlie  discourse  refers  to  a  man 
under  the  law^  but  that  in  the  fourteenth  verse  and  those  which 
follow,  the  subject  of  the  discourse  is  a  man  under  grace.  If 
any  one  denies  this,  let  him  attempt  to  make  out  the  connec- 
tion [between  the  two  portions  of  the  chapter  which  have  just 
been  specified].  Some  of  those  who  have  entertained  that 
opinion,  perceiving  the  difficulty  of  such  an  undertaking,  in- 
terpret this  fourteenth  verse  as  well  as  those  which  preceded 
it,  as  relating  to  a  man  under  the  law,  but  the  fifteenth  and 
following  verses  as  applicable  to  a  man  under  grace.  This, 
also,  we  shall  hereafter  perceive. 

Secondly.  In  the  same  fourteenth  verse,  that  man  about 
whom  the  apostle  treats  under  his  own  person,  is  said  to  be 
carnal ;  but  a  man  who  is  regenerate  and  placed  under  grace 
is  not  carnal,  but  spiritual.  Therefore,  it  is  a  matter  of  the 
greatest  certainty,  that  the  subject  of  the  apostle  in  this  verse 
is  not  a  man  placed  under  grace.  But  a  man  who  is  under 
the  law  is  carnal ;  therefore,  it  is  plain  that  the  subject  of  dis- 
course in  this  verse  is  a  man  under  the  law.  I  prove  that  a  re- 
generate man,  one  who  is  placed  under  grace,  is  neither  carnal, 
nor  so  designated  in  the  Scriptures.  In  Romans  viii,  9,  it  is 
said  "  but  ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  Spirit."  And  in 
the  verse  preceding,  it  is  said,  "  so  then  they  that  are  in  the 
flesh  cannot  please  God  :"  But  a  regenerate  man,  one  who  is 


DISSERTATION. 


placed  under  grace,  pleases  God.  In  Romans  viii,  5,  it  is  said 
"  They  that  are  after  the  flesh  do  mind  the  things  of  the  flesh," 
but  [as  it  is  expressed  in  the  same  verse]  a  man  under  grace 
"  minds  the  things  of  the  Spirit."  In  Gal.  v,  24,  it  is  said, 
"  They  that  aro  Christ's  have  crucified  the  flesh,  with  the  af- 
fections and  lusts  ;"  and  they  that  have  crucified  the  flesh" 
are  not  carnal.  But  men  who  are  regenerate  and  placed  under 
grace  "  are  Christ's  and  have  crucified  the  flesh."  Therefore, 
such  men  as  answer  this  description  are  not  carnal.  In  Eo- 
mans  viii,  14,  it  is  said,  "As  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,  they  are  the  sons  of  God."  Therefore,  they  are  "  led  by 
the  Spirit  of  God  ;"  but  such  persons  are  spiritual, 

2.  But  it  is  here  objected,  "  the  same  man  may,  in  a  difler- 
ent  respect,  be  called  caiiial  and  sjAritual — 'spiritual,'  so  far 
as  he  is  regenerate  through  the  Spirit — '  carnal,'  so  far  as  he 
is  unregenerate  ;  for,  as  long  as  man  is  in  this  mortal  body,  he 
is  not  fully  regenerate.  From  this  arises  a  two-fold  significa- 
tion of  the  work  '  carnal' :  one  denotes  a  man  purely  carnal, 
in  whom  sin  has  the  dominion ;  the  other  denotes  a  man 
partly  carnal  and  partly  spiritual." 

Answer.  I  grant,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  that  man  is 
not  fully  and  perfectly  regenerate  so  long  as  he  is  in  the  pres- 
ent life.  But  this  admission  must  be  correctly  apprehended, 
that  ig,  that  such  perfection  be  understood  as  relating  not  to 
the  essence  and  essential  parts  of  regeneration  itself,  but  to  the 
degree  and  measure  of  the  quantity.  For  the  business  of  re- 
generation \non  ita  hahet']  is  not  carried  on  in  such  a  manner, 
that  a  man  is  regenerate  or  renewed  with  regard  to  some  of 
his  faculties,  but  remains  with  regard  to  others  of  them  alto- 
gether in  the  oldness  of  depraved  nature.  But  this  second 
birth  is  ordered  in  the  same  manner  as  our  first  nativity,  by 
which  we  are  born  human  beings — that  is,  partaking  entirely 
of  human  nature,  but  not  in  the  perfection  of  adult  manhood. 
Thus  also,  does  the  power  of  regeneration  pervade  all  the  fac- 
ulties of  man,  none  of  them  excepted  ;  but  it  does  not  per- 
vade them  perfectly  at  the  first  moment ;  for  it  is  carried  on 
gradually,  and  by  daily  advances,  until  it  is  expanded  or 
drawn  out  to  a  full  and  mature  age  in  Christ.    Hence,  the 


248 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


whole  man  is  said  to  be  regenerated,  according  to  all  Lis  fac- 
nlties,  mind,  affections  and  will ;  and  he  is,  therefore,  with 
regard  to  these,  his  regenerated  faculties,  a  spiritual  person. 

But  as  in  the  Scriptures  a  spiritual  man  and  a  carnal  man 
are  opposed  to  each  other  in  their  entire  definitions,  (for  the 
former  of  them  is  one  who  walks  acccording  to  the  /Spirit^  and 
the  latter  is  he  that  walks  after  the  fleshy  and  as  the  one  is 
mentioned  for  the  opposite  of  tlie  other,)  in  this  respect  indeed, 
the  same  man  cannot  be  said  to  be  at  once  both  spiritual  smd 
carnal.  And  thus  I  reject,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  this 
distinction  of  carnal  persons,  by  which  some  of  them  are  called 
carnal^  in  whom  sin  has  dominion  on  the  predominant  part, 
and  by  which  others  receive  the  appellation  of  carnal  men, 
in  whom  the  flesh  contends  against  the  Spirit  on  the  part 
which  is  less  powerful ;  for  the  rejection  of  this  distinction,  I 
have  the  permission  of  Scripture,  which  is  not  accustomed  to 
reckon  the  latter  of  these  two  classes  in  the  number  of  carnal 
persons.  This  is  expressed  in  a  very  significant  manner  by 
Leo,  on  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord,  in  the  following  words  : 
"  Though  we  are  saved  by  hope,  and  still  bear  about  with  us 
corruption  and  mortal  flesh,  yet  we  are  correctly  said  fiotto  be 
in  the  flesh  if  carnal  affections  have  not  dominion  over  us, 
and  we  deservedly  lay  aside  and  discard  the  name  of  that 
thing  whose  will  we  no  longer  follow." 

Eut  were  this,  their  distinction,  allowed,  still,  that  is  not  yet 
proved  which  they  attempt,  unless  it  be  demonstrated  that  this 
man  is  called  carnal,  not  in  the  first  of  these  respects  or  sen- 
ses, but  in  the  second — not  because  sin  has  the  dominion  in 
him,  but  because  the  flesh  contends  against  the  Spirit,  which 
is  a  result  that  can  never  be  deduced  from  the  text  itself.  For 
It  is  evident  that,  in  the  man  whom  the  apostle  here  calls  car- 
nal, sin  has  the  dominion,  and  the  party  of  the  flesh  is  more 
powerful  in  him  than  that  of  the  Spirit.  Because  "  sin  dwell- 
eth  in  him,  he  does  the  evil  that  he  would  not,  and  he  does 
not  the  good  which  he  would  ;  to  perform  what  is  good,  he 
finds  not ;  but  sin,  which  dwelleth  in  him,  perpetrates  that 
which  is  evil ;  he  is  brought  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin, 
or  he  is  a  captive  under  the  law  of  sin."   All  these  are  certain 


DISSERTATIOIf. 


249 


and  manifest  tokens  of  sin,  wliich  has  the  dominion.  Kor  is 
it  any  valid  objection,  that  the  man  is  compelled,  though  un- 
willing and  reluctant,  to  obey  sin  ;  for  the  dominion  of  sin  is 
two  fold — either  with  the  consent  of  him  who  sins,  or  against 
his  conscience,  and  his  consent  arising  from  his  conscience. 
For  whether  a  servant  obeys  his  Lord  willingly  or  unwillingly, 
he  is  still  the  servant  of  him  to  whom  he  yields  obedience. 
This  is  such  a  certain  truth,  that  no  one  is  able  to  come  from 
the  servitude  of  sin  to  liberty,  except  through  this  way — the 
way  of  this  hatred  of  servitude,  and  of  this  desire  of  obtaining 
deliverance. 

3.  But  some  one  will  say,  "  Even  those  who  are  under  grace 
are  called  carnal  in  1  Cor.  iii,  1,  2." 

I  reply,  The  question  does  not  relate  to  the  word  itself,  but 
to  its  true  meaning  and  the  thing  signified  by  it.  We  must 
try,  therefore,  whether  this  word  has  the  same  signification  in 
this  passage  as  it  has  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  the  epis- 
tle to  the  Komans.  But  they  [at  Corinth]  are  called  carnal 
with  respect  to  knowledge,  and  in  reference  to  [affeclus]  feel- 
ing or  inclination.  In  this  sense,  being  [rudes]  unskilllul  and 
inexperienced  in  the  doctrine  of  piety,  and  the  knowledge  of 
the  gospel,  they  are  called  carnal  in  opposition  to  those  who 
are  spiritual^  who  know  how  to  "judge  all  things,"  (1  Cor.  ii, 
15,)  and  who  are  also  called  "  who  are  perfect,"  in  1  Cor.  ii, 
6,)  and,  in  this  sense,  "  babes  in  Christ,"  and  those  who  have 
need  to  be  fed  with  milk  are  called  carnal.  But  with  respect 
to  feeling  or  inclination,  those  men  are  called  carnal  in  whom 
human  and  carnal  affections  have  the  dominion  and  prevail, 
and  who  are  said,  in  other  passages,  to  he  in  the  fleshy  and  to 
ivalJc  according  to  the  fleshy  in  opposition  to  those  who  are 
spiritual^  who,  "  through  the  Spirit,  have  mortified  the 
deeds  of  the  flesh  and  have  crucified  the  flesh  with  its  affec- 
tions and  lusts."  But  the  apostle  seems  here  to  bestow  this 
appellation  on  the  Corinthians,  or  on  some  of  them,  with  this 
two-fold  reference  ;  for  he  says  that,  with  res^pect  to  knowledge^ 
they  are  "  babes  in  Christ,"  that  is,  unskillful  and  inexperien- 
ced in  the  doctrine  of  piety,  who  had  to  be  "  fed  with  milk, 
and  who  were  not  able  to  bear  solid  food."    But  with  respect 

17  TOL  II. 


250 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


to  affeotlons^  he  says  tliat  they  "  are  carnal,  and  walk  as  men," 
on  account  of  the  contentions  and  divisions  which  prevailed 
among  them,  from  which  it  was  evident  that,  in  them,  the 
flesh  had  the  predominance  over  the  Spirit.  But  in  whatever 
sense  or  manner  the  word  is  used  in  this  passage,  it  brings  no 
advantage  to  the  cause  of  those  who  declare  that  the  apostle 
calls  himself  a  carnal  man  in  Romans  vii,  14.  For  if  the 
same  word  is  not  used  in  1  Cor.  iii,  1,  in  a  sense  similar  to 
that  which  it  bears  in  Romans  vii,  14,  then  it  is  adduced  in  an 
unlearned  and  useless  manner  in  elucidation  of  this  question  ; 
for  equivocation  is  the  fruitful  parent  of  error.  If  the  word  is 
to  be  received  in  the  same  sense  in  both  passages,  then  I  am 
at  liberty  firmly  to  conclude  from  this,  in  favor  of  my  opinion, 
that  the  apostle  cannot  be  called  carnal  in  Romans  vii,  14 ; 
for  under  that  appellation  he  severely  reprehends  the  Corin- 
thians because  he  "  was  not  able  to  speak  unto  them  as  unto 
spiritual  persons,"  since  they  were  such  as  were  still  carnal^* 
which  he  would  have  done  without  any  just  cause,  if  he  were 
himself  also  comprehended  under  that  title  when  understood 
in  the  same  signification. 

4.  Thirdly.  The  same  man  about  whom  the  apostle  is  here 
treating,  is  also  said,  in  this,  the  fourteenth  verse,  to  be  sold 
under  sin^  or,  (which  is  the  same  thing,)  the  slave  of  sin,  and 
become  its  servant  by  purchase,  which  title  can,  in  no  sense 
whatsoever,  be  adapted  to  men  placed  under  grace — a  misap- 
propriation of  epithet,  against  which  the  Scriptures  most 
openly  reclaim  in  many  passages  :  "  If  the  Son,  therefore,  shall 
make  you  free,  ye  shall  be  free  indeed."  (John  viii,  36.)  "For 
he  that  is  dead"  is  justified,  that  is,  he  "  is  freed  from  sin." 
(Rom.  vi,  7.)  "But  God  be  thanked  that  ye  were  the  ser- 
vants of  sin  ;  being  then  made  free  from  sip,  ye  became  the 
"Servants  of  righteousness,"  or  those  who  are  completely  sub- 
ject to  it.  (Rom.  vi,  17,  18.)  Bnt  that  the  two  things  here 
specified  [the  service  of  sin,  and  that  of  righteousness]  are  so 
opposed  to  each  other,  as  not  to  be  able  to  meet  together  at 
on.:e  in  the  same  individual,  is  evident  from  the  twentieth 
verse  of  the  same  chapter  :  "  For  w^hen  ye  w^ere  the  servants 
of  sin,  ye  were  free  from  righteousness."    But  that  the  same 


DISSERTATION. 


251 


remark  applies  to  a  man  who  is  under  the  law,  is  apparent  from 
a  comparison  of  2  Cor.  iii,  17,  Where  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
is,  there  is  liberty,"  with  Gal.  v,  18,  "  Bat  if  ye  be  led  of  the 
Spirit,  ye  are  not  under  the  law therefore,  they  who  are  led 
of  the  Spirit  are  free.  Bat  such  persons  are  not  under  the 
law  /  therefore,  those  who  are  under  the  law  are  not  free,  but 
are  the  servants  of  sin.  For,  whether  any  one  unwillingly, 
and  compelled  by  the  force  of  sin,  obeys  it,  or  whether  he  does 
it  willingly — whether  anyone  becomes  the  slave  of  sin  by  the 
deed  of  his  first  parents,  or  whether,  in  addition  to  this,  "  he 
has  sold  himself  to  work  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,"  as  it 
is  related  concerning  Ahab  in  1  Kings  xxi,  20.  In  each  of 
these  cases  is  the  man  truly  and  deservedly  called  the  servant 
of  sin.  For  of  whom  a  man  is  overcome,  of  the  same  is  he 
brought  into  bondage."  (2  Pet.  ii,  19.)  And  "  whosoever 
committeth  sin  is  the  servant  of  sin."  (John  viii,  34.)  ''Know 
ye  not  that  to  whom  ye  yield  yourselves  servants  to  obey,  his 
servants  ye  are  to  whom  ye  obey,  whether  of  sin  unto  death, 
or  of  obedience  unto  righteousness?"  (Rom.vi,  16.)  For  the 
different  mo  le  of  servitude  does  not  exempt  or  discharge  [the 
subject  of  it]  from  servitude,  but  is  conclusive  that  he  is  un- 
der it. 

Should  any  one  reply,  concerning  the  man  mentioned  in 
Romans  vii,  14,  "  that  he  is  not  simply  called  the  servant  of 
sin,  but  that  he  is  so  denominated  with  this  restriction — - 
that  he  is  the  servant  of  sin  with  respect  to  the  flesh,  and  not 
with  respect  to  the  mind,  as  is  apparent  from  the  last  verse 
of  the  same  chapter,  which  is  an  explanation  of  this  verse,"  I 
rejoin  that  this  man  is  simply  called  the  servant  of  sin,  but 
of  the  description  of  those  who  unwillingly  and  with  a  reluc- 
tant conscience  serve  sin.  But  with  respect  to  the  manner  in 
which  the  last  verse"  of  the  chapter  is  to  be  understood,  we 
fihall  perceive  what  it  is  when  we  arrive  at  that  part. 

But  [plerique']  the  greater  part  of  the  divines  of  our  [Pro- 
testant] profession  acknowledge  that  this  fourteenth  verse  must 
be  understood  as  relating  to  an  unregenerate  man,  to  one  who 
is  not  placed  under  grace.  Thus  Calvin  observes  on  this 
verse,  "  The  apostle  now  begins  to  bring  the  law  and  the  na 


252 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


ture  of  man  a  little  more  closely  into  hostile  contact  with  each 
other."  And  on  the  subsequent  verse  he  says,  "  He  now  de- 
scends to  the  more  particular  example  of  a  man  already  re- 
generate." Thus  also,  Beza,  against  Castellio,  in  the  refuta- 
tion of  the  first  argument  to  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth 
calumny,  (fol.  413,)  says,  "St.  Paul  exclaims  that  he  is  not 
sufficient  even  to  think  that  which  is  good  ;  and  in  another 
passage,  considering  himself  [extra]  not  within  the  bounda- 
ries of  grace,  he  says.  But  I  am  carnal^  sold  under  sin.^^ 


YEESE  THE  FIFTEENTH. 

1 .  He  does  not  approve  of  that  which  he  does,  neither  does  he 
do  that  which  he  would,  hut  he  does  that  which  he  hates. 
2.  The  nature  of  the  contest  carried  on  in  man.  3.  The 
opinion  of  St.  Augustine  and  Peter  Martyr,  respecting 
the  conflict  in  msn  who  are  not  horn  again. 

1.  The  fifteenth  verse  contains  a  proof  of  the  affirmation 
in  the  preceding  verse,  which  is,  that  the  man  about  whom 
the  apostle  is  treating,  is" "  sold  under  sin,"  or  is  the  bond-slave 
of  sin. 

For  the  argument  is  taken  from  the  office  and  proper  efiect 
of  a  purchased  servant,  and  of  one  who  has  no  legal  control 
over  himself,  but  who  is  subjected  to  the  power  of  another. 
For  it  is  the  property  of  a  servant,  not  to  execute  his  own  will, 
but  that  of  his  lord,  whether  he  does  this  willingly  and  with 
full  consent,  or  he  does  it  with  the  judgment  of  Lis  own  mind 
exclaiming  against  it,  and  with  his  will  resisting  it.  This  is 
expressed  in  no  unskillful  manner  by  St.  Augustine,  in  his 
Retractions  (lib.  i,  cap.  1:)  "  He  w^ho,  by  the  flesh  that  lusteth 
against  the  Spirit,  does  those  things  which  he  would  not,  lust- 
eth indeed  unwillingly  ;  and  in  this  he  does  not  that  which  he 
would  ;  but  if  he  be  overcome  [by  the  flesh  lusting  against 
the  Spirit]  he  willingly  consents  to  his  lusts — and  in  this  he 
does  nothing  but  what  he  has  willed,  that  is,  devoid  of  right- 


DISSERTATION. 


253 


eousness  and  the  servant  of  sin."  This  is  confirmed  by  Zan- 
chius,  on  the  works  of  Redemption  :  (lib.  i,  cap.  3  :)  "  Un- 
doubtedlj  Peter,  therefore,  denied  Christ  because  he  would, 
though  he  did  not  that  with  a  full  will,  but  reluctantly."  But 
the  proof  [which  the  apostle  adduces  in  the  fifteenth  verse]  is 
accommodated  to  the  condition  of  the  man  about  whom  he  is 
treating,  that  is,  of  a  man  who  is  under  the  law,  and  who  is 
the  servant  of  sin  just  so  far  as  to  serve  it  not  with  full  con- 
sent, but  with  a  conscience  crying  out  against  it.  For  these 
are  the  words  of  the  apostle  :  "  For  that  which  I  do,  I  allow 
not,"  that  is,  I  do  not  approve  of  it.  This  sentiment,  he  ex- 
plains and  proves  more  at  large  in  the  words  which  immedi- 
ately follow  in  the  same  verse  :  "  For  what  I  would,  that  do 
I  not ;  but  what  I  hate,  that  I  do,"  from  which  we  frame  this 
syllogism. 

He  who  approves  not  of  that  which  he  does,  nor  does  that 
which  he  would,  is  the  slave  of  another,  that  is,  of  sin  ; 

But  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  is  treating,  approves 
not  of  that  which  he  does,  nor  does  what  he  would,  but  he 
does  that  which  he  hates  ; 

Therefore,  the  man  who  is  in  this  place  the  subject  of  dis- 
cussion, is  the  slave  of  another,  that  is,  of  sin  ;  and  therefore 
the  same  man  is  unregenerate,  and  not  placed  under  grace. 

2.  But  perhaps  you  will  say,  "  In  this  passage  is  described 
a  contest  in  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  is  treating,  which 
contest  cannot  take  place  in  a  man  who  is  unregenerate." 

Answer.  In  this  passage,  the  contest  between  this  man  and 
sin  is  not  described  ;  but  the  dominion  of  sin,  and  the  servi- 
tude of  the  man  himself  under  sin,  are  demonstrated  from  the 
proper  effect  of  a  servant  by  purchase,  which  effect,  in  reality, 
is  not  produced  by  this  man  without  much  reluctance  of  con- 
science and  great  mental  struggles,  which  precede  the  very 
production  of  the  act ;  but  this  deed  is  not  committed  except 
by  a  mind  which  is  conquered  and  overcome  by  the  force  of 
sin.  Then  I  deny  the  preceding  affirmation  that,  in  an  unre- 
generate man,  of  what  description  soever  he  may  be,  there  is 
discovered  no  contest  of  the  mind  or  conscience  with  the  in- 
clinations and  desires  of  the  flesh  and  of  sin.    ]Sray,  I  further 


254: 


JAMES  AEMINItrS. 


assert  and  afiSrm  ,  that,  in  a  man  who  is  under  the  law,  there 
is  necessarily  a  conflict  between  the  mind  and  conscience  on 
the  one  part,  that  prescribe  those  things  which  are  just  and 
honest,  and  the  inclinations  or  motions  of  sin,  on  the  other, 
which  impel  the  man  to  things  that  are  unlawful  and  forbid- 
den. For  the  Scriptures  describe  to  us  a  two-fold  conflict 
against  sin — the  first,  that  of  the  flesh,  and  of  the  mind  or 
the  conscience — the  second,  that  of  the  flesh  or  sin,  and  of  the 
Spirit. 

The  former  of  these  obtains  in  all  those  who  have  a  knowl- 
edge of  what  is  righteous  and  iniquitous,  of  what  is  just  and 
unjust,  "  in  whose  hearts  is  written  the  work  of  the  law,  and 
whose  thoughts,  in  the  mean  while,  either  accuse  or  excuse 
one  another,"  as  it  is  recorded  in  Eomans  ii,  15,  "  who  hold 
the  truth  in  unrighteousness,"  (i,  18,)  whose  consciences  are 
not  yet  seared  as  with  a  hot  iron,  who  are  not  yet  "  past  all 
feeling,"  (Ephes.  iv,  19,)  and  who  know  the  will  of  their 
Lord,  but  do  it  not.  (Luke  xii,  47.) 

3.  This  view  of  the  matter  is  confirmed  to  us  by  St.  Au- 
gustine, in  his  book  "  The  Exposition  of  certain  propositions 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans,"  (cap.  3,)  in  which  he  says, 
"  Before  the  law,  that  is,  in  the  state  or  degree  before  the  law, 
we  do  not  fight ;  because  we  not  only  lust  and  sin,  but  sins 
have  also  our  approval.  Under  the  law  we  fight,  but  are 
overcome  ;  for  we  confess  that  those  things  which  we  do,  are 
evil ;  and,  by  making  such  confession,  we  intimate  that  we 
would  not  do  them.  But,  because  we  have  not  yet  any  grace 
we  are  conquered.  In  this  [gradu]  condition  it  is  shewn  to 
us,  in  what  situation  we  lie  ;  and  while  we  are  desirous  of  ri- 
sing up,  and  still  fall  down,  we  are  the  more  grievously  af- 
flicted," &c.  This  is  likewise  acknowledged  by  Peter  Martyr, 
who  observes,  on  Eomans  v,  8,  "  We  do  not  deny  that  there 
is  occasionally  some  contest  of  this  kind  in  unregenerate  men  ; 
not  because  their  minds  are  not  carnal  and  inclined  to  vi- 
cious pursuits,  but  because  in  them  are  still  engraven  the 
laws  T)f  nature,  and  because  in  them  shines  some  illumination 
of  the  Spirit  of  God,  though  it  be  not  such  as  can  justify 
them,  or  can  produce  a  saving  change." 


DISSEETATION. 


255 


The  LA.TTER  contest,  that  between  the  flesh  and  the  Spirit, 
obtains  in  the  regenerate  alone.  For  in  that  heart  in  which 
the  Spirit  of  God  neither  is  nor  dwells,  there  can  be  no  con- 
test— though  some  persons  are  said  to  ''resist  the  Holy  Spirit," 
and  to  "  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost,"  which  expressions  have 
another  meaning. 

The  difference  between  these  two  contests  is  very  manifest 
from  the  diversity  of  the  issue  or  consequence  of  each  :  For, 
in  the  firsts  the  flesh  overcomes  ;  but,  in  the  latter^  the  Spirit 
usually  gains  the  victory  and  becomes  the  conqueror.  This 
may  be  seen  by  a  comparison  of  this  passage  with  Gal.  v,  16, 
17 — a  comparison  which  w^e  will  afterwards  undertake. 

But  from  the  proper  efiects  of  the  law  itself,  it  may  be  most 
certainly  demonstrated  that  a  contest  against  sin  is  carried  on 
within  a  man  who  is  so  under  the  law  as  that  it  has  discharged 
all  its  ofiice  towards  him,  and  has  exerted  all  its  powers  in 
him.  For  it  is  the  eflect  of  the  law  to  convict  a  man,  already 
convicted  of  sin,  of  the  righteousness  of  God,  to  incite  him  to 
obedience,  to  convince  him  of  his  own  weakness,  to  inflame 
him  with  a  desire  to  be  delivered,  and  to  compel  him  to  seek 
for  deliverance.  It  is  well  known,  however,  that  these  efiects 
cannot  be  completed  without  a  contest  against  indwelling  sin. 
But  we  have  already  said  that  about  such  a  man  as  this  the 
apostle  treats  in  this  passage — one  who  is  in  this  manner  under 
the  law. 

If  any  man  will  yet  obstinately  maintain,  that  all  unregene- 
rate  persons  in  general  perpetrate  that  to  the  commission  of 
which,  sin  and  the  flesh  persuade,  with  full  consent  and  with- 
out any  reluctance,  let  him  not  view  it  as  a  grievance  if  I 
demand  proof  for  his  assertion,  since  it  is  made  against  express 
testimonies  of  Scripture,  and  since  many  examples  may  be 
adduced  in  proof  of  the  contrary,  such  as  that  of  Balaam,  who, 
against  his  own  conscience,  obeyed  the  king  of  Moab — that  of 
Saul,  who,  against  his  conscience,  persecuted  David — that  of 
the  Pharisees,  who,  through  obstinate  malice,  resisted  the 
Holy  Spirit,  &c.  But  even  that  very  common  distinction,  by 
which  sins  are  distinguished  into  those  of  ignorance^  infirmity 
and  malice^  is  likewise  by  this  method  destro^^ed,  if  all  unre- 


256 


JAMES  AEMINTDS. 


generate  persons  commit  sin  with  full  assent  and  without  any 
struggle  or  reluctance.  I  am  desirous  also,  on  this  occasion, 
to  bring  to  the  recollection  of  the  adverse  party,  the  steps  or 
degrees  by  which  God  is  accustomed  to  convert  his  children 
to  himself  from  wickedness  of  life,  and  which,  if  they  will 
diligently  and  without  prejudice  consider,  they  will  perceive 
that  the  contest  between  the  mind  and  the  flesh,  which  is  ex- 
cited by  the  law,  must  of  necessity  be  placed  among  the 
beginnings  and  the  precursors  of  regeneration. 


YEKSE  THE  SIXTEENTH. 

1.  He  consents  to  the  law  that  it  is  gcod ;  a  consectary 
deduced.  2.  An  objection  answered,  3.  A  second  objec- 
tion. 

1.  From  what  has  preceded,  a  consectary  or  consequence  is 
deduced  for  the  excuse  of  the  law,  in  the  following  words : 
"  If  then,  I  do  that  which  I  would  not,  I  consent  unto  the  law 
that  it  is  good."  In  this  verse  nothing  is  said,  which  may 
not,  in  the  best  possible  manner  and  without  any  controversy, 
agree  with  one  who  is  under  the  law.  For  unless  a  man  under 
the  law  yields  his  assent  to  it  that  it  is  good,  he  is  not  at  all 
under  the  law  :  For  this  is  the  first  effect  of  the  law  in  those 
whom  it  will  subject  to  itself — to  convince  them  of  its  equity 
and  justice  ;  and  when  this  is  done,  such  consent  necessarily 
arises.  It  is  also  apparent  from  the  first  and  second  chapters 
of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  from  the  tenth  chapter,  in 
which  "  a  zeal  of  God  touching  the  law"  is  attributed  to  the 
Jews,  that  this  consent  is  not  peculiar  to  a  regenerate  man, 
nor  is  it  the  proper  efiect  of  the  regenerating  Spirit. 

2.  If  any  one  say,  "  The  subject  in  this  passage  is  that  assent 
by  which  a  man  assents  to  the  whole  law  of  God,  and  which 
cannot  be  in  those  who  do  not  understand  the  whole  law, 
but  none  among  the  unregenerate  understands  the  entire  law 
of  God," 


DISSEETATION". 


257 


I  reply,  fikst,  it  can  never  be  affirmed  with  truth,  that 
"  none  among  the  unregenerate  understands  the  entire  law," 
while  the  following  passages  exclaim  against  such  an  assertion : 
"  That  servant  who  knew  his  Lord's  will  and  did  not  accord- 
ing to  it,  shall  be  beaten  with  many  stripes."  (Luke  xii,  47.) 
"  Though  I  have  the  gift  of  prophecy,  and  understand  all 
mysteries  and  all  knowledge,  and  though  I  have  all  faith,  so 
that  I  could  remove  mountains,  and  have  not  charity,  it  profi- 
teth  me  nothing  ;"  (1  Cor.  xiii,  2  ;)  "  Knowledge  puffeth  up, 
but  charity  edifieth ;"  (1  Cor.  viii,  1 ;)  "  For  it  had  been 
better  for  them  not  to  have  known  the  way  of  righteousness, 
than,  after  they  have  known  it,  to  turn  fi'om  the  holy  com- 
mandment delivered  unto  them."  (2  Peter  ii,  21.) 

Secondly,  ^^^either  can  this  affirmation  be  truly  made  in 
every  case  :  "  I^o  man  assents  to  the  entire  law  unless  he  un- 
derstands the  whole  of  it ;"  for  he  assents  to  the  whole  law 
who  knows  it  to  be  from  God  and  to  be  good,  though  he  may 
not  particularly  understand  all  things  which  are  prescribed  and 
forbidden  in  the  law.  And  where,  among  the  regenerate,  is 
that  man  to  be  found  who  dares  to  claim  for  himself  such  a 
knowledge  of  the  whole  law  ? 

Thirdly.  That  which  is  appropriately  subservient  to  this 
purpose,  is,  a  denial  that  this  passage  has  any  reference  to 
that  consent  by  which  a  man  assents  to  all  the  precepts  of  the 
law  as  being  specially  understood  ;  for  neither  do  the  words 
themselves  indicate  any  such  thing,  nor  does  the  analogy  of 
the  connection  permit  it.  Because  it  is  concluded  from  the 
circumstance  of  his  doing  what  he  would  not^  that  he  "  con- 
sents unto  the  law  that  It  is  good,"  which  conclusion  cannot 
be  deduced  from  this  deed  if  it  be  said,  that  this  expression 
relates  to  the  consent  which  arises  from  a  special  acquaintance 
with  and  an  understanding  of  all  the  precepts  of  the  law.  For 
that  which  this  man  here  says  that  he  does,  is  a  particular 
deed  ;  it  is,  therefore,  prohibited  by  some  special  precept  of 
the  law,  the  knowledge  and  approval  of  which  is  the  cause 
why  he  who  does  that  deed  does  it  \}iolen8\  with  reluctance. 
Hence,  as  from  a  consequent,  it  is  concluded  from  this  deed 
thus  performed,  (that  is,  committed  with  a  mind  crying  out 


S58 


JAMES  AHMINIUS. 


and  striving  against  it,)  that  lie  who  commits  the  deed  in  this 
manner,  consents  to  the  law  that  it  is  good. 

3.  But  some  one  will  perhaps  rejoin  and  say,  "  This  pas- 
sage does  not  relate  to  the  consent  of  general  estimation^  which 
may  be  possessed,  and  is  so,  in  reality,  by  many  of  the  unre- 
generate.  But  it  has  reference  to  the  consent  of  pa/rticular 
approbation^  which  is  the  peculiar  act  of  the  regenerating 
Spirit."  Such  an  objector  ought  to  know  that  those  things 
which  are  confidently  uttered  without  any  attempt  at  proof, 
may,  with  equal  freedom,  be  rejected  without  offering  the 
smallest  reason.  The  thing  itself,  however,  evinces  the  con- 
trary ;  for,  to  consent  to  (he  law  that  it  is  good,  is  not  to 
approve  in  particular  a  deed  which  has  been  prescribed  by  the 
law;  for  ilih  consent  of  particular  approbation  cannot  con- 
sist with  the  perpetration  of  a  deed  which  is  particularly  dis- 
approved. But  the  commission  of  such  an  act  agrees  well 
with  the  consent  about  which  the  apostle  here  treats. 


YEESE  THE  SEYENTEENTH. 

1.  He  no  longer  himself  j^erpetrates  this  evil,  but  it  is  done 
by  sin  that  dtoelleth  in  him,  a  second  Consectary  deduced. 
2.  From  this  verse  are  drawn  two  arguments  for  the  con- 
trary opinion,  both  of  which  are  ref  uted — the  first  argu- 
ment, and  a  rejphj  to  it.  3.  The  second  argument  and  a 
rejply.  4.  An  argument  from  this  verse  in  favor  of  the 
true  opinion.  5.  On  the  word  dwelling,  or  inhabiting, 
according  toils  signification,  and  the  usage  of  Scripture, 
with  quotations  from  Zanchius,  Bucer,  Peter  Martyr,  and 
Muscidus. 

1.  Fkom  the  preceding  verses  is  deduced  another  consectary, 
by  which  this  man  transfers  to  sin  all  the  blame  of  this  mat- 
ter— not  to  excuse  himself,  that  be  far  from  him,  for  the  law 
has  been  given  and  written  on  his  heart,  that  "  his  thoughts 
may  accuse  or  else  excuse  one  another,  but  to  point  out  his 


DISSERTATION. 


259 


ftervile  condition  under  the  dominion  of  sin.  In  this  consec- 
taiy,  therefore,  nothing  can  be  contained  which  does  not  agree 
with  a  man  who  is  under  the  law.  If  it  were  otherwise,  the 
consectary  would  contain  more  than  was  to  be  found  in  the 
premises,  which,  it  has  been  demonstrated,  agree  extremely 
well  with  a  man  who  is  under  the  law. 

2.  But  let  us  see  the  words  of  the  consectary  :  "Now  then, 
it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me,"  that 
*M8,  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me,  does  this."  From  these  words, 
the  opposite  party  seem  capable  of  eliciting  two  arguments  in 
support  of  the  opinion  which  affirms  that  the  apostle  is  here 
treating  about  a  regenerate  man  and  one  who  is  f  laced  under 
grace. 

The  FIRST  of  these  arguments  is  of  this  kind  : — 

"  It  cannot  be  said  of  unregenerate  men  when  they  sin,  that 

they  do  not  commit  it  themselves^  hut  that  it  is  committed  hy 

nn  luhich  dwells  in  thera. 

But  this  is  most  appropriately  said  about  the  regenerate  : 
Therefore,  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  here  treats,  is 

"  not  an  ijnregeneeate  m.an,  but  one  who  is  regenerate." 
Answer.  The  antecedent  must  be  examined  ;  for,  when  it 

is  either  granted  or  denied,  the  consequence  is  also  granted  or 

denied. 

(1.)  It  is  evident,  that  it  cannot  sim>]ply  be  affirmed  con- 
cerning any  man,  whatever  his  condition  may  be,  that  he  does 
not  himself  commit  the  sin  which  he  commits  /  for  this  is  a 
contradiction  in  the  adjunct ;  and  the  apostle  declares,  that  this 
man  "  does  evil."  Therefore,  if  this  can  be  said  with  truth, 
the  expression  must  be  understood  relatively  and  in  a  certain 
respect.  But  this  relation  or  respect  ought  to  be  founded 
either  in  the  man  himself  who  perpetrates  the  offijnce,  or  in 
the  perpetration  itself,  (i.)  If  this  respect  be  founded  in  the 
man  himself,  it  must  be  thus  generally  explained  and  enunci- 
ated— The  sin  which  this  man  commits,  he  does  as  he  is  such 
a  one ;  and  he  does  not  as  he  is  such  a  one."  (ii.)  If  the 
respect  be  founded  in  the  perpetration  and  the  effecting  of  the 
sin,  then  it  must  be  taken  from  the  varied  relation  of  causes 
of  the  same  kind  to  the  effect.    But  in  this  passage,  the  apostle 


260 


JAMES  AHMmrus. 


is  treating  on  the  efficient  cause  of  sin,  whicli  is  here  allowed 
to  be  two  fold — the  man,  and  six  dwelling  in  him,  but  so 
as  this  may  be  said  to  be  effected  by  indwelling  sin,  and  not 
by  the  man.  Wherefore,  this  effect  must  be  taken  from  the 
distribution  of  the  efficient  cause,  by  which  it  is  distributed 
into  that  which  is  primary  and  principal,  and  that  which  is 
secondary  and  less  principal. 

(2.)  It  can  by  no  means  be  said  by  him  who  is  inspired  with 
a  sincere  love  of  truth,  that  this  two-fold  respect  is  applicable 
only  to  a  man  who  is  regenerate  and  jjlaced  under  grace,  but 
that  it  does  not  at  all  appertain  to  a  man  placed  under  the 
law  or  does  not  in  the  least  agree  with  him.  For  as  this  respect 
or  relation  is  two-fold  in  the  eegenerate,  on  account  of  the 
imperfection  of  regeneration  in  this  life,  and  the  remains  of 
"  the  old  man,"  according  to  which  respect  it  may  be  said 
concerning  a  regenerate  man,  that  "  as  he  is  regenerate  he 
does  this,  and  as  he  is  not  regenerate  he  does  it  not  or  does 
not  do  it  perfectly so,  likewise,  in  a  man  under  the  law, 
the  respect  is  two-fold  on  account  of  [advenium]  the  coming 
in  of  the  law ;  for  he  is  "  carnal"  and  "  the  servant  of  sin,"  and 
is  under  the  law,  that  is,  "  he  consents  to  the  law  that  it  is  good," 
which  consent  is  neither  of  the  flesh  nor  according  to  the  flesh, 
that  is,  it  is  not  from  depraved  nature.  "Wherefore,  it  may 
be  said  concerning  a  man  under  the  law,  that  he  commits  sin, 
not  as  lie  is  under  the  law^  nor  as  he  consents  to  the  law  that  it 
is  good.)  but  as  lie  is  carnal  and  the  servant  of  sin. 

(3.)  The  second  respect  (according  to  which  the  effect,  that 
has  simply  proceeded  from  two  concurrent  causes,  is  taken 
away  from  one  of  them  and  ascribed  to  the  other)  seems  to 
hold  the  chief  place  in  this  passage,  as  it  does  also  in  this  say- 
ing of  the  apostle,  "  I  labored  more  abundantly  than  they  all; 
yet  not  I,  but  the  grace  of  God  which  was  with  me."  (1  Cor. 
XV,  10.)  For  it  is  well  known  to  be  a  very  general  practice 
to  ascribe  the  effect  to  the  principal  and  primary  of  two  con- 
current causes,  at  the  same -time  taking  away  the  same  effect 
from  the  secondary  cause  ;  especially  if  by  some  means,  either 
beyond  nature,  or  against  the  will  and  by  the  force  of  the  su- 
perior cause,  the  secondary  one  has  been  drawn  forth  to  effi- 


DISSERTATION. 


261 


ciencj.  Thus,  an  ambassador  who  manages  the  cause  of  his 
prince,  is  not  said  himself  to  act,  but  his  prince,  who  makes 
use  of  his  services.  Thus,  much  more  appropriately,  if  a  ser- 
vant, who  is  oppressed  by  a  tyrannical  lord,  does  something 
against  his  own  will  at  the  command  and  through  the  com- 
pulsion of  his  lord,  he  will  not  himself  be  said  to  do  this,  but 
his  lord  who  has  the  dominion  over  him.  And  it  is  most 
manifest,  to  every  one  who  will  look  upon  these  words  of  the 
apostle  [irretortis]  with  unjaundiced  ej-es,  that  they  convey 
this  meaning  ;  as  is  apparent  from  the  epithet  which  is  attribu- 
ted to  sin,  the  perpetrator  of  this  evil,  and  by  which  the  do- 
minion of  sin  is  denoted,  that  is,  "sin  that  dwelleth  in  me 
does  it." 

(4.)  It  is  no  matter  of  wonder,  that  "  he  does  it  not,  but  sin 
does  it for  "  when  the  law  came,  sin  revived  and  he  died." 
(Hom.  vii,  9.)  Therefore,  the  cause  of  actions,  is  that  which 
lives,  and  not  that  which  is  dead. 

It  is  apparent,  then,  that  the  first  part  of  the  antecedent  in 
this  argument  is  false,  and  on  this  account  the  second  part  is 
not  reciprocal ;  therefore,  the  conclusion  eannot  be  deduced 
from  it  by  good  consequence,  which  consequence  concludes 
[that  the  apostle  is  here  treating]  about  a  regenerate  m.an,  to 
the  exclusion  of  the  unregenerate, 

3.  The  second  argument  is  drawn  from  the  adverbs  of  time, 

now^''  and  "  no  more^''  which  are  used  in  this  verse ;  and 
from  which  a  conclusion  is  thus  drawn  in  favor  of  the  same 
opinion:  "  These  adverbs  have  respect  to  time  antecedent; 
but  the  time  antecedent  is  the  time  when  the  man  was  not  re- 
generate. As  though  he  had  said.  Formerly^  when  I  was  not 
yet  regenerated^  I  committed  sin  /  hut  now  I  no  longer  do 
this^  because  I  am  regenerated.  Therefore,  it  is  apparent  that 
this  present  time,  which  is  signified  by  the  adverb  "  now^^^ 
must  be  understood  concerning  the  state  of  regeneration,  since 
it  cannot  be  said  concerning  an  unregenerate  man,  that 
"  though  he  formerly  coinmitted  sin,  he  commits  it  no  moreP 

Answer. — I  grant  it  to  be  a  great  truth,  that  these  adverbs 
denote  relation  to  time  antecedent,  and  that  in  fact  the  passage 
is  thus  commodiously  explained  :  Formerly  indeed  I  jperjpe- 


262 


JAMES  AEMINIDS. 


trated  evil^  hut  now  I  no  longer  do  this.  But  I  deny  that  tlie 
time,  antecedent  embraces  the  entire  state  before  regeneration  5 
for  the  state  of  nnregeneracj,  or  that  which  is  prior  to  regen- 
eration, is  distinguished  by  our  author,  the  apostle  himself, 
into  another  two-fold  state — hefore  or  without  the  law^  and 
under  the  law ^  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  ninth  verse  of  this 
very  chapter.  And  the  antecedent  time,  in  reference  to  which 
it  is  said  "  now^^  and  "  ?io  more^'^  comprises  the  state  withovi 
the  law  but  the  present  time  [described  by  the  two  adverbs] 
comprises  the  state  under  the  law.  As  if  he  had  said,  For- 
merly, when  I  was  vnthout  thelaw^  I  committed  sin,  but  now, 
when  I  am  under  the  law^  I  no  longer  commit  it,  but  sin  that 
dwelleth-in  me."  This  is  in  unison  with  what  is  said  in  the 
ninth  verse  :  "  For  I  was  alive  without  the  law  once,"  or  for- 
merly ;  "  but  when  the  commadment  came,  sin  revived,  and 
I  died."  For,  while  "  he  was  alive  without  the  law,"  he  com- 
mitted evil  without  any  reluctance  of  mind  or  of  will.  There- 
fore, at  that  tirne.)  he  did  evil ;  but  now.^  being  placed  under 
the  law,  he  undoubtedly  commits  sin,  but  he  does  it  againsi 
his  conscience  and  not  without  resistance  on  the  part  of  his 
will.  Wherefore,  the  cause  and  culpability  of  sin  must  be  as- 
cribed, not  so  much  to  the  man  himself,  as  to  the  violent  im- 
pulse  of  sin. 

4.  Thus  far  we  have  perceived,  that  this  verse  contains  no- 
thing w^hich  can  afford  support  to  the  opposite  opinion.  Let 
us  further  see  whether  an  argument  may  not  be  elicited  frotn 
it,  for  establishing  the  truth  of  the  other  opinion,  which  de- 
clares that  it  must  be  understood  concerning  an  unregenerato 
man,  and  one  who  is  placed  under  the  law : 

The  apostle  says  that    sin  dwelleth  in  this  man." 

But  sin  does  not  dwell  in  those  who  are  regenerate. 

Therefore,  the  apostle  is  not,  in  this  passage,  treating  about 
the  regenerate  or  those  who  are  placed  under  grace,  but  about 
the  unregenerate  and  those  who  are  under  the  law. 

One  of  the  premises  of  this  syllogysm  is  in  the  text :  the 
other  must  be  demonstrated  by  us.  I  am  aware  indeed,  that 
this  seems  wonderful  to  those  who  are  accustomed  to  the  dis* 
tinction  of  sin,  by  which  one  kind  is  called  ruling  or  govern^ 


DISSERTATION. 


263 


ing,,  and  another  receives  the  appellation  of  sin  existi'ng  with- 
in us^  or  of  iadwelling  and  inhabiting  sin,  and  who  snppose 
that  the  former  of  these  epithets  is  peculiar  to  the  un regene- 
rate, and  the  latter  to  the  regenerate.  But  if  any  one  require 
a  proof  of  this  distinction,  those  who  ought  to  give  it  will 
evince  a  degree  of  hesitation.  But  is  not  one  kind  of  sin  ru- 
ling or  reigning^  and  another  existing  within  and  not  reign- 
ing^ and  is  not  the  former  peculiar  to  the  unregenerate,  and 
the  latter  to  the  regenerate?  Who  can  deny,  when  the  Scrip- 
tares  affirm,  that  there  are  in  us  the  remains  of  sin  and  of  the 
old  man  as  long  as  we  survive  in  this  mortal  life  ?  But  wdiat 
man,  conversant  with  the  Scriptures,  shall  distinguish  reign^ 
ing  from  indwelling  or  inhahiting  sin,  and  will  account  in- 
dwelling sin  to  be  the  same  as  the  sin  existing  within  f  In- 
deed, indwelling  sin  is  reigning  sin,  and  reigning  is  indwell- 
ing^ and  therefore  sin  does  not  dwell  in  the  regenerate,  be- 
cause it  does  not  domineer  or  rule  in  them.  I  prove  the  first 
part  of  this,  both  from  the  very  signification  of  the  word  to 
inhabit  or  dwell,  and  from  the  familiar  usage  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

5.  (1.)  Concerning  the  signification  of  the  word,  Zanchius 
observes,  in  his  treatise  On  the  Attributes  of  God,  God  is 
not  said  to  dwell  in  the  wdcked,  but  he  dwells  in  the  pious. 
For  what  is  it  to  dwell  in  any  place?  It  is  not  simply  to  be 
there,  as  people  are  at  inns  and  places  of  entertainment  during 
journeys ;  but  it  is  to  reign  and  have  the  dominion  at  hi 
pleasure  as  if  in  his  own  residence."  (Lib.  ii,  cap.  6,  quest. 
3.)  On  Ephesians  iii,  IT,  the  same  Zanchius  says,  "  In  this 
proposition,  Christ  dwells  in  your  heart  by  faith,  the  word  to 
dwell  is  undoubtedly  put  metaphorically  ;  the  metaphor  be- 
ing taken,  not  from  those  persons  who,  as  tenants  or  lodgers, 
and  as  strangers  or  travelers,  tarry  for  a  season  in  the  house 
or  inn  belonging  to  another ;  but  it  is  taken  from  masters  of 
families,  who,  in  their  own  proper  dwelling-houses  live  at  lib- 
erty, work,  govern  the  family,  and  exercise  dominion." 

BucER  observes,  on  the  very  passage  wdiich  is  the  subject 
of  our  meditation,  "He  says  that  this  destructive  force  or 
power  dwells  in  him,  that  is,  it  entirely  occupies  him  and  has 


264 


JAMES  AEMXNTTS. 


the  dominion,  as  is  the  manner  of  those  who  are  at  their  own 
house,  in  their  proper  dwelling  and  domicil.  The  apostle 
Paul,  and  all  Scripture,  frequently  employ  this  metaphor  of 
inhabitation  or  residing ;  and  by  it  they  usually  signify  the 
dominion  and  the  certain  presence,  \_fere  ad  solidum]  almost 
perpetually,  of  that  which  is  said  to  inhabit."  And  this  is  one 
of  his  subsequent  remarks  :  TThen,  in  this  manner,  sin  re- 
sides in  us,  it  completely  and  more  powerfully  besieges  us  and 
exercises  dominion.'' 

Peter  Maktye  says,  on  Pomans  viii,  9,  "  The  metaphor 
of  habitation,  or  indwelling,  is  taken  from  this  circumstance 
— that  they  who  inhabit  a  house,  not  only  occupy  it,  but  also 
govern  in  it  and  order  [all  things  in  it]  at  their  own  option." 

The  subjuined  remark  is  from  Xuscrxus  on  this  passage : 
"  And  that  he  may  evidently  express  this  tyranny  and  vio- 
lence of  sin,  he  does  not  say,  *  Sin  exists  in  me,'  but  '  Sin  dwells 
in  me.'  For  by  the  word  to  dwell  or  inhabit^  he  shews  that 
the  dominion  of  sin  is  complete  in  him  :  and  that  sin  has,  as 
it  were,  fixed  his  seat,  or  taken  up  his  residence,  in  him. 
Evil  reigns  in  no  place  with  greater  power  than  in  the  place 
where  it  has  fixed  its  seat :  that  is  what  we  see  in  the  case  of 
tyrants.  Thus,  in  a  contrary  manner,  God  is  said  to  have 
dwelt  in  the  midst  of  the  children  of  Israel ;  because  among 
no  other  people  did  he  declare  his  goodness  with  such  strong 
evidence,  as  he  did  among  them,  according  to  this  expression 
of  the  Psalmist — He  hath  not  dealt  so  with  an y  nation,  (cxlvii, 
20.)  In  this  sense,  the  word  to  inhabit  or  to  dwells  is  very 
often  used  in  the  Scriptures.  When,  therefore,  the  apostle 
wished  to  declare  the  power  and  tyranny  of  sin  in  him,  he 
said  that  it  dwelt  in  him,  as  in  its  proper  domicil,  and  thus 
fully  reigned.*' 

Caevin',  in  his  Institutes^  says  (lib.  iv,  cap.  6,  sec.  11,)  that 
we  are  circumcised  in  Christ,  with  a  circumcision  not  made 
by  hands,  having  laid  aside  the  body  of  sin  which  dwelt  in 
our  flesh  ;  which  he  calls  the  circumcision  of  Christ. 

(2.)  What  I  have  said,  in  accordance  with  Bucer,  about  the 
usage  of  Scripture,  is  plain  from  the  following  passages  :  "  My 
Father  and  I  will  come  unto  him,  and  make  our  abode  with 


DISSERTATION.         ■  2G5 

liiiii."  (Jolm  xiv,  23.)  "  But  if  tlie  Spirit  of  him  that  raised 
up  Jesus  from  the  dead  dwell  in  you,  he  that  raised  up  Christ 
from  the  dead  shall  also  quicken  your  mortal  bodies  by  his 
Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you."  (Eom.  viii,  11.)  "For  ye  are 
the  temple  of  the  living  God ;  as  God  hath  said,  I  will  dwell 
in  them,  and  walk  in  them  ;  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they 
shall  be  my  people."  (2  Cor.  vi,  16.)  "That  Christ  may 
dwell  in  yom^  hearts  by  faith."  (Ephes.  iii,  17.)  "  When  I 
call  to  remembrance  the  unfeigned  faith  that  is  in  thee,  which 
dwelt  first  in  thy  grand-mother  Lois,  and  thy  mother  Eunice ; 
and,  I  am  persuaded,  in  thee  also."  (2  Tim.  i,  5.)  "That 
good  thing  which  was  committed  unto  thee,  keep  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  which  dwelleth  in  us."  (i,  11:.)  "  Do  ye  think  that  the 
Scripture  saith  in  vain.  The  Spirit  that  dioelleth  in  us  lusteth 
to  envy  f  (James  iv,  5.)  "  Nevertheless,  we,  according  to 
his  promise,  look  for  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth,  wherein 
dwelleth  righteousness."  (2  Pet.  iii,  13.)  "  Thou  has  not  de- 
nied my  faith,  even  in  those  days  Vv^herein  Antipas  was  my 
faith  fulmartyr,  who  was  slain  among  you  where  Satan  dwell- 
eth." (Rev.  ii,  13.)  According  to  this  usage,  the  saints  are 
said  to  be  "  a  habitation  of  God  througli  the  Spirit."  (Ephes. 
ii,  22.) 

It  is  manifest,  therefore,  from  the  signification  of  the  word 
and  its  most  frequent  usage  in  the  ITol^^  Scriptures,  that  in- 
dioelling  sin  is  exactly  the  same  as  reigning  sin. 

But  it  is  easy  now,  likewise,  to  demonstrate  the  second  pre- 
mise in  the  syllogism,  (p.  53,)  which  is,  "Sin  does  not  dwell 
in  those  who  are  regenerate."  For  [according  to  the  passages 
of  Scripture  quoted  in  the  preceding  paragraph]  the  Holy 
Spirit  dwells  in  them.  Christ,  also,  dwells  in  their  hearts  by 
faith ;  and  they  are  said  to  be  "  a  habitation  of  God  through 
the  Spirit ;"  therefore,  sin  does  not  dwell  in  them ;  because 
no  man  can  be  inhabited  by  both  God  and  sin  at  the  same 
time  ;  and  when  Christ  has  "  overcome  the  strong  man  arm- 
ed," he  binds  him  hand  and  foot  and  casts  him  out,  and  thus 
occupies  his  house  and  dwells  in  it.  Sin  does  not  dwell  in 
those  who  are  "dead  to  ein,"  and  "in  whom  Christ  liveth." 
But  the  regenerate  "  do  not  live  in  sin,"  but  are  "  dead  to  it ;" 

18  TOL.  U. 


/ 

266 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


(Korn.  vi,  2  ;)  and  in  tliem  Christ  dwelleth  and  livetli ;  (Gal. 
ii,  20  ;)  therefore,  sin  does  not  dwell  in  the  regenerate. 

Let  the  two  subjoined  passages  of  Scripture  be  compared 
together  :  "  IsTow  then  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that 
dwelleth  in  me  (Kom.  vii,  IT  :)  "  I  live  ;  yet  no  more  I, 
but  Christ  liveth  in  me."  (Gal.  ii,  20.)  We  shall  be  able  by 
this  comparison  most  fully  to  demonstrate,  that  in  thi^  verse 
the  apostle  has  not  been  speaking  about  himself,  but  has  ta- 
ken upon  himself  to  personate  the  character  of  a  man  who 
lives  to  sin,  and  in  whom  sin  lives,  dwells  and  operates.  Yet 
it  does  not  follow  from  this,  that  no  sin  is  in  the  regenerate ; 
for  it  has  already  been  shewn,  that  to  le  in  any  place,  and 
there  to  dwell^  to  have  the  dominion^  and  to  reign,  are  two 
different  things. 


DISSERTATIOIT. 


26T 


THE  EIGHTEENTH  AND  NINETEENTH  VERSES. 

1.  "  In  this  man^  {that  is^  in  his  fleshy)  duoelUth  no  good 
thing^''  (^c.  2.  An  argumeiit  for  the  contrary  opinion  is 
proposed  from  the  eighteenth  verse — the  answer  to  it.  3. 
A  reply  and  its  rejoinder,  4.  Another  reply  and  its  re- 
joinder, 5.  An  argument  from  the  same  words  in  favor 
of  the  true  opinion.  6.  2'he  second  "part  of  tlie  eighteenth 
verse "  To  will  is  present  with  this  man^  hut  how  to  p>er- 
form  that  whioh  is  good^  he  finds  not^"^  7.  An  argument 
for  the  contrary  opinion  from  the  second  part  of  this  verse 
• — the  answer  to  it^  with  distinctions  between  each  kind  of 
willifig  and  nilling^  with  extracts  from  St.  Augustine^ 
Zanchius  and  Bucer.  8.  An  argument  for  the  true  opin- 
ion^ from  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  verses — the  proof 
of  the  major  proposition,^  which  alone  can  he  called  in 
question.  9.  An  objection  and  the  answer  to  it,  10.  A71- 
other  reply  and  its  rejoinder — not  only  some  other  things^ 
hut  likewise  those  which  precede  things,^  that  are  saving^ 
have  a  place  in  some  of  the  wiregenerate^  with  extracts  in 
confirmation  from  St,  Augustine^  and  references  to  Calvin^ 
Beza  and  Zanchius,  11.  The  dissimilar  appellations  hy 
which  the  Scriptures  distinguish  those  who  are  under  con- 
straint through  the  law^  from  those  who  are  renewed  or  re- 
generated hy  the  grace  of  the  gospel, 

1.  Let  the  eighteenth  verse  now  be  brought  under  consider- 
ation, in  which  the  apostle  follows  up  the  same  rendering  of 
a  cause,  and  the  proot  of  it.    The  rendering  of  the  cause  is, 

For  I  know  that  in  me,  (that  is,  in  mj  flesh,)  dwelletk  no 
good  thing  by  which  words  the  same  thing  is  signifled,.  aa. 
by  the  following  :  "  I  am  carnal."  For  he  is  carnal,  in  whom 
no  good  thing  dwelleth.  The  proof  is  contained  in  these 
words  :  "  For  to  will  is  present  with  me ;  but  how  to  perform 
that  which  is  good,  I  find  not." 

2.  From  this  rendering  of  the  cause,  some  persons  hare  in- 


268 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


stituted  an  argument  for  the  support  of  their  opinion,  in  the 
following  terms : 

"  In  this  man,  about  whom  the  apostle  is  treating,  are  the 
flesh,  and  some  other  thing  either  distinct  or  differing  from 
flesh  ;  otherwise,  the  apostle  would  not  have  corrected  himself 
by  saying,  In  me^  that  is,  in  my  flesh. 

"  But  in  unregenerate  ]3ersons,  there  is  nothing  else  but  the 
flesh ; 

Therefore,  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  here  treats, 
is  a  regenerate  person." 

Answer.  I  grant,  that,  "  in  this  man  is  some  other  thing 
diverse  or  distinct  from  the  flesh  for  this  is  to  be  seen  in  the 
apostolical  correction.  But  I  deny,  that  "in  unregenerate 
persons  is  nothing  else  beside  the  flesh"— m  those  unregene- 
rate persons,  I  say,  icho  are  under  the  laio,  and  about  whom 
we  are  engaged  in  this  controversy. 

I  adduce  this  reason  for  the  justness  of  my  negation ;  be- 
cause in  7nen  who  are  under  the  law  is  a  mind  which  knows 
gome  truth  concerning  God  and  "  that  which  may  be  known 
of  God,"  (Eom.  i,  18,  19,)  which  has  a  knowledge  of  that 
which  is  just  and  unjust,  and  whose  "  thoughts  accuse  or  else 
excuse  one  another,"  (ii,  1-15,)  w^hich  kn'ows  that  the  indul- 
gence of  carnal  desires  is  sinful,  (vii,  7,)  wdiich  says  that 
"men  must  neither  steal  nor  commit  adulter}-,"  (ii,  21,  22,) 
<fec.,  &c.  To  certain  of  th^  iLnregenerate,  also,  is  attributed 
some  illumination  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  (Heb.  vi,  4,)  a  "  knowl- 
edge of  the  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus  Christ,"  a  "  knowledge  of 
the  way  of  righteousness,"  (2  Pet,  ii,  20,  21,)  some  acquaint- 
ance  w^ith  the  will  of  the  Lord,  (Luke  xii,  47,)  the  gift  of 
prophecy,  e%c.,  &c.  (1  Cor.  xiii.)  That  man  who  is  bold 
enough  to  style  such  things  as  these  "  the  flesli,^^  inflicts  a 
signal  injury  on  God  and  his  Spirit.  And  indeed  how,  under 
the  appellation  of  "  the  fiesh^''  can  be  comprehended  that 
which  accuses  sin,  convinces  onm  of  sin,  and  compels  them  to 
eeeh  deliverance  f 

There  is,  then,  in  men  who  are  under  the  law,  "  the  flesh, 
and  something  beside  the  flesh,"  that  is,  a  mind  imbued  with 
•a  knowledge  of  the  law,  and  consenting  to  it  that  it  is  good  ; 


DISSERTATION. 


269 


and  in  some  unregenerate  2^ersons  there  is,  beside  the  flesh,  a 
mind  enb'ghtened  by  a  knowledge  of  the  gospeh    Eut  to  the 
"  other  thing  which  is  distinct  from  the  flesh,"  the  apostle  does 
not,  in  this  chapter,  give  the  title  of  the  spirit^  but  that  o  f 
the  mind. 

The  remark  of  Musculus  on  this  passage  is  as  follows  ; 
"  Behold  how  cantioiislj  the  apostle  again  employs  the  word 
to  dwell.  He  does  not  say,  '  I  know  that  in  me  is  no  good 
thing  for,  whence  could  he  otherwise  approve  of  good  things 
and  detest  those  which  are  evil,  consenting  to  'the  law  of  God, 
that  is  holy,  and  just,  and  good,'  if  he  had  in  himself  nothing 
of  good?  Eut  he  says,  'I  know  that  in  me  dwelleth  no  good 
thing  that  is,  it  does  not  reign  in  me,  does  not  possess  the 
dominion,  since  it  has  seized  upon  sin  for  itself,  and  since  the 
will  earnestly  desires  that  which  is  good,  though  it  is  not 
free,  but  weak  and  under  restraint,  enduring. the  power  of  a 
tyrant." 

-  3.  Bat  some  one  will  here  reply,  "  ITot  only  is  something 
difierent  from  the  flesh  attributed  to  this  man,  but  the  inhab- 
itation or  residence  of  good  is  likewise  attributed  to  that  which 
is  different  from  the  flesh  ;  for,  otherwise,  that  part  of  the 
verse  in  y/hich  the  apostle  corrects  himself,  would  not  have 
been  necessary  ;  but  in  an  unregenerate  man,  or  one  who  is 
under  the  law,  there  is  nothing  in  Avhich  good  may  reside. 
Therefore,  this  is  a  regenerate  man,"  &c. 

Rejoinder.  While  I  concede  the  first  of  these  premises,  I 
deny  the  second  which  affirms,  "In  an  unregenerate  man,  or 
one  who  is  under  the  law,  there  is  nothing  in  which  good  may 
dwell  or  reside."  For  in  the  mind  of  such  a  man  dwells  some 
good  thing,  that  is,  some 'truth  and  knowledge  of  the  law. 
The  signs  of  habitation  or  residence  are  the  works  v/hich  this 
knowledge  and  truth  in  the  mind  unfold  or  disclose.  For  in- 
stance— a  conscience  not  only  accusing  a  man  of  sin,  but  also 
convincing  him.  of  it — the  delivering  of  a  sentence  of  condem- 
nation against  the  man  himself — -the  enacting  of  good  laws — 
careful  attention  to  public  discipline — the  punishment  of 
crimes — the  defence  of  good  people — despair  of  obtaining 
righteousness  by  the  law  and  by  legal  works,  [G07n2mlsio'\  the 


270 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


impelling  necessity  to  desire  deliverance  and  to  seek  for  it. 
These  worlvs,  indeed,  are  most  certain  signs  of  the  law  dwell- 
ing and  reigning  in  the  mind  of  such  a  man  as  has  been 
described. 

On  this  point,  I  eiitreat,  tliat  no  one  will  condemn  of  her- 
esy that  which  he  has  yet  either  not  heard,  or  not  sufficiently 
considered.  For  I  do  not  assert  that  good  dwells  and  reigns 
in  a  man  under  the  law,  or  in  any  of  the  unregenerate.  For 
to  reign  in  the  mJnd,  and,  simply,  to  reign  in  the  man,  are  not 
the  same  thing.  Because,  if  this  knowledge  ^veYe  simply  to 
dwell  and  reign  in  the  man,  this  very  man  would  then  live  in 
a  manner  agreeable  to  his  knowledge,  the  resistance  of  the 
flesh  being  repelled  by  that  which  would  simply  obtain  the 
first  and  principal  place  in  a  man. 

If  any  one  closely  considers  this  rendering  of  the  cause,  and 
accomn^odatcs  it  to  the  design  of  the  apostle,  he  will  under- 
stand that  the  apostolical  correction  was  both  necessary  and 
produced  for  this  purpose — that,  notwithstanding  the  indwell- 
ing of  something  good  in  the  mind  of  a  man  who  is  under  the 
law",  a  proper  and  adequate  cause  might  be  given  why,  in  such 
a  man  as  this,  [c/ffectiis]  "the  motions  of  sins"  flourish,  and 
work  all  concupiscence ;  which  cause  is  this  :  In  the  flesh  of 
this  man  dvrelleth  no  good  thing.  For  if  any  good  thing 
dwelt  in  his  flesh,  he  would  then  not  only  know^  and  will  v/hat  is 
good,  but  would  also  complete  it  in  actual  02:)eration,  his  {offec 
tus\  passions  or  desires  being  tamed  and  subdued,  and  subjected 
to  the  law  of  God.  In  reference  to  this,  it  is  appositely  ob- 
served by  Thomas  Aquinas  on  this  very  passage — "  And  by 
this,  it  is  rendered  manifest  that  the  good  thing  [or  blessing] 
of  grace  does  not  dwell  in  the  flesh  ;  because  if  it  dwelt  in  the 
flesh,  as  I  have  the  faculty  of  willing  that  which  is  good  through 
the  grace  that  dwells  in  my  mind,  so  I  should  then  that  of 
perfectiTig  or  fulfilling  what  is  good  thi-ough  the  grace  that 
would  dwell  in  my  mind." 

4.  But  sonie  one  will  object — "  In  the  Scriptures,  the  whole 
unregenerate  man  is  styled  flesh.  Thus,  For  that  he  also  is 
flesh.  (Gen.  vi,  3.)  lliat  which  is  lorn  of  the  fleshy  is  flesh. 
(John  iii,  6.)" 


DISSEKTATION. 


271 


Reply. — First.  This  mode  of  speaking  is  metonymical,  and 
the  word  carnem^  "  flesh,"  is  used  instead  of  carnal^  by  a 
usage  peculiar  to  the  Hebrews,  who  employ  the  abstract  for 
the  concrete.  This  is  clearly  pointed  out  by  Beza,  on  the  pas- 
sage just  quoted,  (John  iii,  6,)  on  which  he  observes — ''^  Flesh 
is  here  put  for  carnal^  as,  among  the  Hebrews,  appellatives  are 
frequently  employed  as  adjectives.  This  was  also  a  practice 
among  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  as  in  the  words,  ^a(3ap,aa, 
SGelus^^  &c. 

Secondly.  Though  the  word  fleshy  in  the  abstract,  be  urged, 
yet  the  wIioIq  man  may  be  called  fleshy  but  not  the  whole  of 
man  ;  for  the  mind  which  condemns  sin  and  justifies  the  law, 
is  not  flesh.  But  this  very  same  mind  may  in  some  degree 
be  called  carnal.^  because  it  is  in  a  man  who  is  carnal,  and  be- 
cause [care]  the  flesh,  which  fights  against  the  mind,  brings 
the  whole  man  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin,  and  by  this 
means  has  the  predominance  in  that  man. 

5.  But  from  these  remarks  may  be  constructed  an  argu- 
ment in  confirmation  of  the  true  sentiment,  in  the  following 
manner : 

In  the  flesh  of  a  regenerate  man  dwells  that  which  is  good ; 
therefore,  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  discourses  is  un- 
regenerate. 

I  prove  the  proposition  from  the  proper  effect  of  the  in- 
dwelling Spirit ;  for  the  Holy  Spirit  crucifies  the  flesh  wiih  its 
affections  and  lusts,  mortifies  the  flesh  and  its  deeds,  subdues 
the  flesh  to  Himself,  and  weakens  the  body  of  the  flesh  of 
sin :  And  Ho  performs  all  these  operations  by  his  indwelling. 
Therefore,  good  dwelleth  in  the  flesh  of  a  regenerate  man. 
The  assumption  is  in  the  text  itself;  therefore,  the  conclusion 
follows  from  it. 

6.  Let  us  now  examine  the  proof  of  the  afiirmation — that 
in  the  flesh  of  this  man  "dwelleth  no  good  thing."  This  is 
contained  in  the  words  subjoined  :  "  For  to  will  is  present  with 
me;  but  how  to  perform  that  which  is  good,  I  find  not." 
From  a  comparison  of  the  question  to  be  proved,  and  the  ar- 
gument produced  to  prove  it,  it  is  apparent  that  the  argument 
is  contained  in  these  words  ;  "  For  I  find  not  to  perform  that 


272 


JAlilES  AEMINirS. 


wliicli  is  good,"  thfit  is,  I  attain  not  to  the  performance  of  that 
winch  is  good.  This  proof  is  taken  from  tlie  effect ;  for  as, 
from  the  indwelling  in  the  flesh  of  that  which  is  good,  would 
follow  the  performance  of  good;  so,  from  "no  good  thing 
dw^elling  in  the  flesh,"  arises  the  impossihility  of  performing 
that  which  is  good.  For  these  words,  "  for  to  will  is  present 
w^ith  me,"  are  employed  through  a  comparison  of  things  that 
difier ;  which  was  necessary  in  this  place,  because  the  proof 
was  to  be  accommodated  to  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle 
w^as  treating  :  And  this  is  the  way  in  which  the  proof  is  ac- 
commodated— "  To  will  is  indeed  present"  with  a  man  who  is 
under  the  law  ;  but  the  same  man  "  does  not  find  to  perform 
that  which  is  good,"  because  he  is  carnal.  From  this  it  is 
apparent,  that  "  he  is  carnal,"  and  that  "in  his  flesh  dwelleth 
no  good  thing."  If  an}^  good  thing  resided  in  his  flesh,  it 
would  in  that  case  restrain  the  strong  force  and  desires  of  the 
flesh,  and  prevent  their  being  able  to  hinder  the  performance 
of  the  good  which  he  might  will. 

But  let  the  whole  proof  be  stated  in  the  following  syllogism  : 

In  the  flesh  of  him  v,dio  [yelle  hahet~\  has  the  power  to  will, 
but  who  "  does  not  find  to  perform  that  which  is  good," 
dwelleth  no  good  thing  ; 

But  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  is  treating,  has  indeed 
the  power  of  willing,  but  "  does  not  find  to  perform  that 
whichiis  good ;" 

Therefore,  in  the  flesh  of  such  a  man  as  this,  "  dwelleth  no 
good  thing." 

It  will  not  be  denied  by  an}^  one  who  is  in  the  least  degree 
acquainted  with  logic,  and  who  has  accurately  considered  the 
eighteenth  verse,  that  this  is  the  syllogism  of  the  apostle. 
But  from  this  proposition  I  may  conclude  the  proposition  of 
the  syllogism  which  I  have  already  adduced  for  confirm- 
ing my  opinion,  and  which  is,  "  In  the  flesh  of  a  regene- 
rate man  dwelleth  some  good  thing,"  by  this  argument, 
"  Because  a  regenerate  man  finds  to  perform  that  which  is 
good."  For  the  contrary  would  be  a  consequence  from  things 
contrary.  That  this  maj^  the  more  plainly  appear,  let  us  now 
see  this  proposition,  with  others  which  are  deduced  from  it 


DISSERTATION". 


2Y3 


bj  inversion.  Tlie  proposition  is,  "  ISTo  man  who  isincappJjle 
of  performing  tliat  which  is  good,  has  any  good  thing  dwell- 
ing in  [lis  flesh  therefore,  by  inversion,  "  i\o  man  who  has 
that  which  is  good  dwelling  in  his  flesh,  is  incapable  of  per- 
forming what  is  good."  To  this,  is  equivalent  the  following  : 
"  Every  man  Vvdio  lias  any  thing  good  dwelling  in  his  flesh, 
is  capable  of  perfurmiiig  what  is  good  ;  in  fact  he  is  capable, 
because  he  has  good  dwelling  within  him,"  therefore,  by 
simple  inversion  in  a  necessary  and  reciprocal  matter, 

Every  one  wdio  is  capable  of  performing  what  is  good, 
has  good  dvfelling  in  his  flesh."  This  is  the  major, from  which 
I  assume, 

"  But  a  regenerate  man  can  perform  that  wdiich  is  good." 
(Phil,  ii.) 

"  Tiierefore,  a  regenerate  man  has  good  dwelling  in  his 
flesh ;"  v/hich  was  the  major  of  the  syllogism  that  I  had  pre- 
viously adduced. 

7.  But  the  defenders  of  the  contrary  opinion  seem  to  think, 
that,  from  this  proof,  they  are  able,  for  the  confirmation  of 
their  own  opinion,  to  deduce  an  argument,  which  they  frame 
thus  : 

He  is  a  regenerate  man,  v/ith  whom  to  will  that  which  is 
good  is  present : 

But  lo  iDill  that  which  is  good,  is  present  with  this  man  ; 
Therefore,  this  man  is  reerenerate. 

Answer.  Before  I  reply  to  each  part  of  this  syllogism,  I 
must  remove  the  ambiguity  which  is  in  tlris  phrase,  to  will 
that  wdiich  is  good,"  or  the  equivocation  in  the  v/ord  to 
will."  Fur  it  is  certain,  that  there  are  two  kinds  of  tliis  voli- 
tion or  wnlling  ;  since  it  is  here  asserted  of  one  and  the  same 
man,  that  he  is  occupied  both  in  ivUling  and  in  not  willing 
that  wdiich  is  good,  concerning  one  and  the  same  object ;  in 
vnlling  it^  as  he  [merely]  wills,  it  but  in  not  willing  it  as  he 
does  not  perform  it ;  for  this  is  the  reason  v/hy  he  does  not 
perform  it,  because  he  does  not  will  it^  though  [he  acts  thus] 
with  a  will  which  is,  as  it  were,  the  servant  of  sin  and  com- 
pelled not  to  y:ill  [that  which  is  good].  Again,  he  is  occupied 
both  in  not  loilling  and  in  lolUing  that  which  is  evil  concern- 


274 


JAMES  AJRMTNTITS. 


ing  one  and  the  same  object — in  not  willing  it,  as  lie  does  not 
will  it  and  hates  it — in  willing  it,  as  he  performs  the  very 
same  [evil]  thing  ;  for  he  would  not  do  it,  unless  he  willed  it, 
though  [he  acts  thus]  with  a  will  which  is  impelled  to  will  by 
sin  that  dwelleth  in  him. 

St.  Augustine  gives  his  testimony  to  the  expressions  which 
I  have  here  employed,  in  his  Betr actions.  (Lib.  i,  cap.  13.) 

The  remarks  of  Bucer  on  this  passage  are  :  "  Hence  it  came 
to  pass  that  David  did,  not  only  that  which  he  willed,  but  also 
that  which  he  willed  not.  He  did  that  which  he  loilled.  not, 
not  indeed  when  he  committed  the  offence,  but  when  the 
consideration  of  the  divine  law  still  remained,  and  when  it 
was  restored.  He  did  that  which  he  willed^  just  at  the  time 
when  he  actually  concluded  and  determined  about  the  woman 
presented  to  his  view.    So  Peter,"  &c.  (Fol.  368.) 

Zanchius,  also,  in  his  book,  On  the  ^VorJcs  of  Redemption, 
observes — "  This  was  undoubtedly  the  reason  why  Peter  de- 
nied Christ,  lecause  Jieioilled  so  to  do,  though  not  with  a  full 
will,  neither  did  he  wilHngly  deny  Him."  (Lib.  i,  cap.  3, 
fol.  25.) 

Wherefore,  since  it  is  impossible  that  there  should  be  only 
a  single  genus  of  volition  and  nolition,  or  one  mode  of  loilling 
and  not  willing,  by  which  a  man  %oills  the  good  and  does  not 
will  the  same  good,  and  by  which  he  does  not  will  the  evil 
and  wills  the  same  evil;  this  phrase,  "  to  will  that  which  is 
good"  and  "  not  to  will  that  which  is  evil,"  must  have  a  two- 
fold meaning,  which  we  will  endeavor  now  to  explain. 

(1.)  Because  every  volition  and  every  nolition  follows  the 
judgment  of  the  man  respecting  the  thing  presented  as  an 
object,  each  of  them,  therefore,  is  also  different  according  to 
the  diversity  of  the  judgment.  But  the  judgment  itself,  with 
reference  to  its  cause,  is  two-fold :  For  it  either  proceeds  from 
the  mind  and  reason  approving  the  law  that  it  is  good,  and 
highly  esteeming  the  good  which  the  law  prescribes,  and 
[contra]  hating  the  evil  which  it  forbids  ;  or,  it  proceeds  from 
the  senses  and  affections,  and  (as  the  expression  is)  from  [sen- 
suali]  sensible  knowledge,  or  that  which  is  derived  from  the 
senses,  and  which  approves  of  that  which  is  useful,  pleasant 


DISSERTATION. 


275 


and  deliglitfiil,  though  it  be  forbidden  ;  but  which  disapproves 
of  that  which  is  hurtful,  useless,  and  unpleasant,  though  it  be 
prescribed.  The  former  of  these  is  called  the  judgment  of 
general  estimation,"  the  latter  "the  judgment  of  particular 
approbation  or  operation."  Hence,  one  volition  is  from  the 
judgment  of  general  estimation;  the  other  is  from  the  judg- 
ment of  particular  approbation,  and  thus  becomes  a  nolition. 
On  this  account,  the  will  which  follows  the  judgment  of  gen- 
eral estimation  wills  that  which  the  law  prescribes,  and  does 
not  will  that  which  the  law  forbids.  But  the  same  will,  when 
it  follows  the  judgment  of  jparticidar  approbation^  wills  the 
delectable  or  useful  evil  which  the  law  forbids,  and  does  not 
will  the  troublesome  and  hurtful  good  which  the  law^  pre- 
scribes. 

(2.)  This  distinction,  w^hen  considered  with  respect  to  one 
and  the  same  object  contemplated  in  various  ways,  will  be 
still  further  illustrated.  For  that  object  which  is  presented  to 
the  will,  is  considered  either  under  a  general  form,  or  under 
one  that  is  particular.  Thus  adulter}^  is  considered  either  in 
general,  or  in  particular ;  considered  in  general^  adultery  is 
condemned  by  reason  as  an  evil  and  as  that  which  has  been 
forbidden  by  the  law  ;  considered  in jparticidar ^  it  is  approved, 
by  the  knowledge  wdiich  is  derived  from  the  senses,  as  some- 
thing good  and  delectable.  Bucer,  when  treating  on  this 
subject,  in  his  remarks  on  the  same  verse,  says :  "  But  there 
is  in  man  a  two-fold  wdll — one,  that  by  which  he  consents  to 
the  law^ — another,  that  by  which  he  does  what  he  detests. 
The  one  follows  the  knowledge  of  the  law  by  which  it  is  known 
to  be  good  ;  The  other  follows  the  knowledge  which  is  de- 
rived from  the  senses,  and  which  is  concerning  things  present." 

(3.)  This  volition  and  nolition  may  likewise  be  distinguished 
in  another  manner.  There  is  one  volition  and  nolition  which 
follow  the  last  judgment  formed  concerning  the  object ;  and 
another  volition  and  nolition  which  follow  not  the  last  hut  the 
antecedent  judgment.  In  reference  to  the  former  of  these, 
volition  will  be  concerning  good  ;  in  reference  to  the  latter, 
volition  v;ill  be  concerning  the  evil  opposed  to  it,  and  con- 
trariwise.   Thus,  likewise,  concerning  nolition.    And  with  ' 


276 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


respect  to  the  former,  it  will  be  volition  ;  in  respect  to  the 
latter,  it  will  be  nolition,  .concerning  the  same  object,  and 
the  contrary.  Btit  the  volition  and  nolition  which  follow  not 
the  last  judgment,  cannot  so  well  be  simply  and  absolutely 
called  "  volition"  and  "  nolition,"  as  velleity  and  nolleity. 
Those,  however,  which  follow  the  last  judgment,  are  simply 
and  absolutely  called  efficacious  volition  and  nolition^  to  which 
the  effect  succeeds. 

(4.)  Thomas  Aquinas,  on  this  very  passage  in  Romans  vii, 
says,  that  the  former  is  not  a  full  vjill,  the  latter  is  a  complete 
will.  But  let  this  same  distinction  be  considered  as  it  is  em- 
ployed concerning  God.  For  God  is  said  to  will  some  things 
ajyprovingly  as  being  good  in  themselves,  but  to  w^ill  other 
things  efficaciously^  as  simply  conducing  to  his  glory. 

We  must  now  consider  the  kind  of  willing  and  nilling  about 
which  the  apostle  is  here  treating.  He  is  treating,  not  about 
the  volition  and  nolition  of  i)articulaT  approbation^  but  about 
those  of  general  estimation — not  about  the  volition  and  noli- 
tion which  are  occupied  concerning  an  object  considered  in 
2)articiihu\  but  concerning  one  generally  considered — not 
about  the  volition  and  nolition  which  follow  the  last  judg- 
ment, but  about  those  which  follow  the  antecedent  judgment — 
not  about  simjole^  absolute  and  complete  volition,  but  about 
that  which  is  incomplete^  and  which  rather  deserves  to  be 
called  velleity.  "For  the  good  that  he  would,  he  does  not ; 
but  the  evil  which  he  would  not,  that  he  does."  If  he  willed 
the  good  prescribed  by  the  law,  with  the  will  of  particular 
approl)ation,  which  follows  the  last  judgment,  he  would  then 
also  perform  the  good  which  he  had  thus  willed.  If,  in  the 
same  manner,  he  did  not  will  the  evil  forbidden  by  the  law, 
he  would  then  abstain  from  it.  This  is  explained,  in  a  learned 
and  prolix  manner,  by  Bacer  on  this  passage. 

[1.)  I  now  come  specially  to  each  part  of  the  syllogism, 
in  which  the  major  proposition  seems  to  me  to  be  rep- 
rehensible on  two  accounts  :  (i.)  Because  "  to  will  that  which 
is  good,"  which  is  here  the  subject  of  the  apostle's  argument, 
is  not  peculiar  to  the  regenerate ;  for  it  also  appertains  to  tlio 
unregenerate — for  instance,  to  those  who  are  under  the  law, 


DISSEETATION. 


277 


and  wlio  have  in  themselves  all  those  things  which  God  iisn- 
ailj  effects  hj  the  law ;  (ii.)  Because,  even  vvdien  used  in  that 
other  sense,  [as  applicable  to  the  regenerate,]  it  does  not  con- 
tain a  full  definition  of  a  regenerate  man  ;  for  a  regenerate 
man  not  only  icUls  that  which  is  good,  but  he  also  2^^^ forms 
it ;  because  "  it  is  God  who  worketh  in"  the  regenerate  both 
to  will  &nd  to  doP  (Phil,  ii,  13.)  And  "  God  hath  prepared 
good  works,"  that  tlie  regenerate  "  might  walk  in  them  ;"  or, 
"  he  hath  created  them  in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good  works." 
(Eph.  ii,  10.)  They  are  "  new  creatures ;"  (2  Cor.  v,  17;)  are 
endued  with  that  "  faith  which  worketh  by  love  ;"  (Gal  v,  6 ;) 
and  to  them  is  attributed  the  observance,  or  keeping  of  the 
commandments  of  God  ;"  (1  Cor.  vii,  19  ;)  they  "do  the  will 
of  God  from  the  heart ;"  (Eph.  vi,  6  ;)  "  have  obeyed  from 
the  heart  that  form  of  doctrine  to  which  they  were  delivered." 
(Eom.  vi,  17,)  &c,  &c.  From  these  observations,  it  is  appa- 
rent that  the  particle  "  only"  must  be  added  to  the  proposi- 
tion ;  for  when  this  is  appended,  it  will,  at  first  sight,  betray 
the  falsehood  and  insufiiciency  of  the  proposition  in  this  man- 
ner :  "  J-Ie  is  a  regenerate  man,  with  whom  only  to  will  that 
which  is  good  is  present." 

(2.)  To  the  ASSUMPTION,  I  reply  that  it  is  proposed  in  a  mu- 
tilated form.  For  this,  "  to  will  is  present  with  me,"  is  not 
the  entire  sentence  of  the  apostle  ;  but  it  is  one  part  separated 
from  another,  without  which  it  is  not  consistent.  For  this  is 
a  single  discrete  axiom  :  "  To  will  is  present  with  me  ;  but 
how  to  perform  that  which  is  good,  I  find  not."  But  nothing 
can  be  solidly  concluded  from  a  passage  of  Scripture  proposed 
in  a  form  that  is  mutilated.  I  add  that,  when  this  latter  part 
of  the  apostle's  sentence  is  omitted,  the  reader  is  left  in  doubt 
concerning  the  kind  of  volition  and  nolition  which  is  here  the 
subject  of  investigation.  But  when  the  omission  is  suppjied 
from  the  text  of  the  apostle,  it  plainly  signifies  that  the  sub- 
ject of  discussion  is  inefficacious  volition  and  that  of  general  es- 
timation^ but,  as  has  already  been  observed,  this  kind  of  voli- 
tion is  not  peculiar  to  the  regenerate. 

But  the  assumption  may  be  simply  denied,  as  not  having 
been  constructed  from  the  context  of  the  apostle.   For  St 


278 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


Paul' does  not  attribute  to  the  man  about  whom  he  is  treating, 
that  he  ^Yills  that  which  is  good  and  does  not  will  that  which 
is  evil,  but  that  he  does  that  which  is  evil,  and  does  not  per- 
form that  which  is  good,  to  which  attributes,  something  tan- 
tamount to  a  description  is  added — "  That  which  I  would  not," 
and  "  that  which  I  w^ould."    This  description  is  added  in  ac- 
commodation to  the  state  of  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle 
is  treating,  and  it  is  required  bj  the  method  of  demonstrative 
investigation.    For  he  had  determined  to  produce  the  proper 
and  reciprocal  cause,  why  the  man  about  whom  he  is  treating 
"  does  not  lind  to  perform  that  which  is  good     and  therefore 
all  other  causes  were  to  be  removed,  among  which  were  the 
nolition  of  good  and  the  volition  of  evil,  also  ignorance  of  that 
which  is  good  and  that  which  is  evil,  &c.    Thus,  in  that  other 
disjunctive  axiom,  "  to  will  is  present  with  me  ;  but  how  to 
perform  that  which  is  good  I  find  not,"  the  principal  thing 
which  is  attributed  to  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  is 
treating,  or  that  which  is  predicated  concerning  him,  is  that 
"  he  does  not  find  to  perform  that  whicli  is  good      lor  the 
illustration  of  which,  is  produced  that  difi'ering  attribute,  "  to 
will  indeed  is  present  with  me."    This  is  a  remark  which  must 
be  diligently  observed  by  every  one  who  engages  in  the  inqui- 
ry, about  the  most  correct  manner  in  which  this  very  difiicult 
passage  is  to  be  understood. 

8.  But  the  preceding  observations  make  it  evident  that  a 
contrary  conclusion  may  be  drawn  from  these  two  verses  in 
the  following  manner : 

He  is  not  a  regenerate  man,  with  whom  to  will  is  indeed 
present,  but  not  to  perform^  and  who  does  not  perform  the 
good  which  he  would,  but  who  commits  the  evil  which  he 
would  not ;  (this  is  from  the  description  of  regeneration  and 
its. parts ;) 

But  to  m'/Hs  present  with  this  man,  but  not  to  perform  /  and 
the  same  man  does  not  perform  the  good  which  he  would,  but 
commits  the  evil  which  he  would  not ; 

Therefore,  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  is  treating,  is 
unregenerate. 

The  assumption  is  in  the  text  of  the  apostle ;  the  propoei- 


DISSEETATIOH-. 


279 


tion  alone,  therefore,  remains  to  be  proved.  Eegeneration 
not  only  illuminates  the  mind  and  conforms  the  will,  but  it 
likewise  restrains  and  [ordinat]  regulates  the  affections,  and 
directs  the  external  and  the  internal  members  to  obedience  to 
the  divine  law.  It  is  not  he  who  wills,  but  he  who  performs 
the  will  of  the  Father,  that  enters  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
(Matt,  vii,  21.)  And,  at  the  close  of  the  same  chapter,  he  is 
called  a  wise  or  j^rudent  man  "  who  doetJi  the  sajdngs  of 
Christ,"  not  he  who  only  wills  them.  Consult  what  has  al- 
ready been  remarked  in  the  negation  of  the  proposition  in  that 
syllogism  which  w^as  produced  for  the  establishment  of  the 
contrary  opinion ;  and 

Those  persons  who  fulfill  the  will  of  the  flesh  in  its  desires, 
are  un regenerate ; 

But  this  man  fulfills  the  will  of  the  flesh  ; 

Therefore,  he  is  un  regenerate. 

But  these  [attributes]  agree  most  appropriately  with  a  man 
who  is  under  the  law — to  will  that  which  is  good  and  not  to 
will  evil,  as  agreeing  with  one  who  "  consents  to  the  law  that 
it  is  good,"  but  not  to  do  that  which  is  good  and  to  do  evil,  as 
agreeing  with  one  who  is  "  carnal  and  the  servant  of  sin." 

9.  But  perhaps  some  one  will  here  reply,  "  From  this  man 
is  not  simply  taken  away  the  performing  of  that  which  is 
good,  but  the  comjpletion  of  it,  that  is,  the  perfect  performance 
of  it — a  view  of  the  matter  which  has  the  sanction  of  St.  Au- 
gustine, who  gives  this  explanation  of  the  word." 

Answer.  Omitting  all  reference  to  the  manner  in  which  the 
opinion  of  these  persons  agrees  with  that  of  St.  Augustine, 
which  we  shall  afterwards  examine,  I  affirm  that  this  is  a  mere 
evasion.  For  the  Greek  verb  xarsp^/ac^ofxai,  does  not  signify  to 
do  any  thing  jperfectly^  but  simply  to  do^  to  jperform^  to  dis- 
patch, as  is  very  evident  from  the  verb  '^otso,  "  to  do,"  which 
follows,  and  from  this  word  itself  as  it  is  used  in  the  fifteenth 
verse,  where,  according  to  their  opinion,  this  verb  cannot  sig- 
nify completion  or  perfect  perforinance — for  the  regenerate, 
to  whom,  as  they  understand  it,  this  clause  in  the  fifteenth 
verse  applies,  do  not  perfectly  perform  that  which  is  evil. 
Let  those  passages  of  the  sacred  writings  be  consulted  in  which 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


this  word  occurs,  and  its  true  meaning  will  be  easily  under- 
stood from  Scripture  usage. 

I  add  that,  in  this  sense,  "  the  completion,"  that  is,  "  the 
perfect  performance"  of  that  which  is  good,  can  no  more  be 
taken  away  from  a  regenerate  man,  than  "  the  willing"  of  that 
which  is  good.  For  while  the  regenerate  continue  in  this 
state  of  mortality,  they  do  not  "  perfectly  will"  that  which  is 
good. 

10.  But  some  one  will  further  insist,  that  "  to  will  good" 
and  "  not  to  will  evil,"  in  Avhat  mode  and  sense  soever  these 
expressions  are  taken,  is  "  some  good  thing  ;"  and  that,  to  an 
unregenerate  man  can  be  attributed  nothing  at  all  which  can 
be  called  good,  without  bringing  contumely  on  grace  and  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

To  this  I  reply.  We  have  already  understood  the  quality 
and  the  quantity  of  this  "  good  thing."  But  I  am  desirous  to 
have  proof  given  to  me,  that  nothing  at  all  which  is  good  can 
be  attributed  to  an  unregenerate  man,  of  what  description  so- 
ever he  may  be.  According  to  the  judgment  which  I  have 
formed,  the  Scriptures  in  no  passage,  openlj^  affirm  this  ;  nei- 
ther do  I  think  that,  by  good  consequence  from  them,  it  can 
be  asserted.  But  the  contrary  assertion  may  be  most  evident- 
ly proved. 

"The  truth"  which  is  mentioned  in  Eomans  i,  18,  is  good, 
as  being  opposed  to  "  unrighteousness  ;"  but  this  "  truth"  is 
in  some  unregenerate  persons.  "  The  work  of  the  law,"  which 
is  mentioned  in  Romans  ii,  15,  is  a  good  thing  ;  but  it  is  "writ- 
ten in  the  hearts"  of  heathens,  and  that  by  God.  "  The  taste 
of  the  heavenly  gift,  of  the  good  word  of  God,  and  of  the 
powers  of  the  world  to  come,"  (Heb.  vi,  4,  6,)  is  good  ;  and 
yet  it  is  in  the  unregenerate.  "  To  have  escaped  the  pollutions 
of  the  world  through  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord  and  Savior 
Jesus  Christ,  and  to  have  known  the  way  of  righteousness," 
(2  Pet.  ii,  20,  21,)  are  good  things  ;  yet  they  belong  to  the 
unregenerate.  "  To  receive  the  Avord  of  God  with  joy,"  (Mat- 
thew xiii,  20,)  is  good  ;  and  it  appertains  to  the  unregenerate. 
And,  in  general,  all  those  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  ai*e 
for  the  ediiication  of  the  church,  and  which  are  attributed  to 


DISSERTATION. 


281 


several  of  the  reprobate,  are  good  things.  (1  Cor.  xii  &  xiii.) 
To  acknowledge  themselves  to  be  sinners,  to  mourn  and  la- 
ment on  account  of  personal  transgressions,  and  to  seek  deliv- 
erance from  sin,  are  good  things  ;  and  they  belong  to  some 
who  are  unregenerate.  ^^Taj,  no  man  can  be  made  partaker 
of  regeneration,  unless  he  have  previously  had  within  him 
such  things  as  these.  From  these  passages,  it  is  evident  that 
it  cannot  be  said  with  truth,  that  nothing  of  good  can  be  at- 
tributed to  the  unregenerate,  what  kind  of  men  soever  they 
may  be. 

If  any  one  reply,  "  But  these  good  thin^o'  are  not  [salufaria] 
saving  in  their  nature,  neither  are  they  such  as  they  ought  to 
be,"  I  acknowledge  the  justness  of  the  remark.    Yet  some  of 
them  are  necessarily  previous  to  those  which  are  of  a  saving 
nature ;  besides,  they  are  themselves  in  a  certain  [momento] 
degree  saving.    That  which  has  not  yet  come  up  to  the  point 
toward  which  it  aims,  does  not  immediately  lose  the  name  of 
"  a  good  thing."    The  dread  of  punishment,  and  slavish  fear 
are  not  that  dread  and  fear  which  are  required  I'rom  the  chil- 
dren of  God  ;  yet  they  are,  in  the  mean  time,  reckoned  by  St. 
Augustine  among  those  good  things  which  precede  conversion. 
In  his  thirteenth  sermon  on  these  words  of  the  apostle.  Ye 
have  not  received  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  unto  fear^  (Rom. 
viii,  15,)  he  says,  "  What  is  this  word  again  ?    It  is  the  man- 
ner in  which  this  most  troublesome  schoolmaster  terrifies. 
What  is  this  word  again  7    It  is  as  ye  received  the  spirit  of 
bondage  in  Mount  Sinai.    Some  man  will  say,  The  spirit  of 
hondage  is  one^  the  spirit  of  liherty  another.    If  they  were  not 
the  same,  the  apostle  would  not  use  the  word  again.  There- 
fore, the  spirit  [in  both  cases]  is  the  same ;  but,  in  the  one 
case,  it  is  on  tables  of  stone  in  fear^  in  the  other,  it  is  on  the 
fleshly  tables  of  the  heart  in  /ov^,"  &c.    In  a  subsequent  pas- 
sage he  says,  ^'  You  are  now,  therefore,  not  in  fear,  but  in  love, 
that  you  may  be  sons,  and  not  servants.    For  that  man  whose 
reason  for  still  doing  well  is  his  fear  of  punishment,  and  who 
does  not  love  God,  is  not  yet  among  the  children  of  God. 
My  wish,  however,  is  that  he  may  continue  even  to  fear  pun- 
ishment.   Fear  is  a  bond-servant,  love  is  a  free  man  ;  and,  if 
19  VOL  u. 


282 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


we  may  tlius  express  oni-selves,  fear  is  the  servant  of  love. 
Therefore,  lest  the  devil  take  possession  of  thy  heart,  let  this 
servant  have  the  precedence  in  it,  and  preserve  a  place  within 
for  his  Lord  and  Master,  who  will  soon  arrive.  Do  this,  act 
thus,  even  from  fear  of  punishment,  if  jou  are  not  yet  able  to 
do  it  from  a  love  of  righteousness.  The  master  will  come  and 
the  servant  will  depart ;  because,  when  love  is  perfected,  it 
casts  out  fear." 

Calvin  likewise  numbers /mY/aZ  fear  among  good  things; 
and  Beza,  from  the  meaning  attached  to  it  by  Calvin  and  him- 
self, makes  it  to  be  preliminary  to  regeneration,  as  we  have 
already  perceived. 

But  these  things,  and  others,  (if  any  such  there  be,)  are  at- 
tributed to  the  unregenerate,  without  any  injury  to  grace  and 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  because  they  are  believed  to  be,  in  those  in 
whom  they  are  found,  through  the  operation  of  grace  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  For  there  are  certain  acts  which  precede  con- 
version, and  they  proceed  from  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  prepares 
the  will ;  as  it  is  said  by  Zanchius,  in  his  Judgment  on  the 
First  and  Second  Tome  of  the  oljections  and  answers  of 
Pezelius^  which  judgment  is  subjoined  to  the  second  tome. 
Consult  likewise  what  we  have  cited  in  a  preceding  page  from 
Beza  against  Til  man.  Heshusius. 

11.  What  man  is  there  who  po  sesses  but  a  moderate  ac- 
quaintance with  theological  matters,  and  does  not  know,  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  employs  the  preaching  of  the  word  in  this  or- 
der, that  he  may  first  convict  us  of  sin,  by  the  law,  of  whose 
equity  and  righteousness  he  convinces  the  mind — may  accuse 
us  of  being  obnoxious  to  condemnation — may  place  before 
our  eyes  our  own  impotency  and  weakness — may  teach  ns 
that  it  is  impossible  to  be  justified  through  the  law,  (Kom.  iii, 
19-21) — that  he  may  compel  us  to  flee  to  Christ,  using  "the 
law  as  a  schoolmaster,  to  lead  us  by  the  hand  to  Christ,"  who 
is  "  the  end  of  the  law  for  righteousness  to  every  one  that  be- 
lieveth"?  (Gal.  ii,  16-21  ;  iii,  1-29.)  On  this  account,  also, 
the  unregenerate  receive  certain  names  or  appellations,  in  the 
Scriptures  :  They  are  called  sestners,  as  they  are  contra-distin- 
guished from  the  righteous  that  boasted  themselves  of  their 


DISSERTATION. 


283 


righteousness,  which  sinners  Christ  came  to  call — laboring 
and  HEAVY-LADEN,  to  wliom  Christ  came  to  afford  refreshment 
and  rest — sick  and  infirm,  and  such  as  stand  in  need  of  a 
Physician's  aid,  that  they  may  be  distinguished  from  those 
who  supposed  themselves  to  be  "  whole,"  and  not  to  require 
the  services  of  a  Physician — 'Poor  and  needy,  to  whom  Christ 
came  [evangelizare]  to  preach  the  gospel — captives  and  pris- 
oners IN  BONDS,  who  acknowledge  their  sad  condition,  and 
whom  Christ  came  to  deliver — contrite  in  spirit  and  broken 
hearted,  whom  Christ  came  to  bind  up,  &c. 

Secondly.  Having  completed  these  effects  by  the  law,  the 
same  Spirit  begins  to  use  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  by  which 
he  manifests  and  reveals  Christ,  infuses  faith,  unites  believers 
together  into  one  body  with  Christ,  leads  them  to  [communi- 
07iem\  a  participation  of  the  blessings  of  Christ,  that,  remis- 
sion of  sins  being  solicited  and  obtained  through  his  name, 
they  may  begin  further  to  live  in  him  and  from  him.  On  this 
account  likewise,  the  very  same  persons  are  distinguished  by 
certain  other  appellations  in  the  Scriptures.  They  are  called 
believers,  justified,  redeemed,  sanctified,  regenerated,  and 
liberated  persons,  grafted  into  Christ,  concorporate  with  him, 
bones  of  his  bones,  flesh  of  his  flesh,  &c. 

From  this  order,  it  appears  that  some  acts  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
are  occupied  concerning  those  who  are  unregenerate,  but  who 
are  to  be  born  again,  and  that  some  operations  arise  from  them 
in  the  minds  of  those  who  are  not  yet  regenerate,  but  who  are 
to  be  born  again.  But  I  do  not  attempt  to  determine  whether 
these  be  the  operations  of  the  Spirit  as  He  is  the  regenerator. 
I  know  that,  in  Pomans  viii,  15-17,  the  apostle  distinguishes 
between  the  Spirit  of  adoption  and  the  spirit  of  bondage.  I 
know  that,  in  2  Cor.  iii,  6-11,  he  distinguishes  between  the 
ministration  of  the  law  and  of  death,  and  the  ministration  of 
the  gospel  and  of  the  Spirit.  I  know  the  apostle  said,  when  he 
was  writing  to  the  Galatians,  that  the  Spirit  is  not  received  by 
the  works  of  the  law,  but  by  the  faith  of  the  gospel  of  Christ. 
And  I  think  that  we  must  make  a  distinction  between  the 
Spirit  as  he  prepares  a  temple  for  himself^  and  the  same 
Spmt  as  He  inhabits  that  temple  when  it  is  sanctified.  Yet 


JAMES  AEMmms. 


I  am  unwilling  to  contend  with  any  earnestness  about  this 
point — whether  these  acts  and  operations  may  be  attributed  to 
the  Spirit,  the  regenerator,  not  as  He  regenerates^  but  as  He 
preparss  the  hearts  of  mm  [ad  suscipiendam]  to  admit  the 
efficiency  of  regeneration  and  renovation.  Hence,  I  think 
it  is  once  generally  clear,  that  this  opinion  is  not  contumelious 
to  the  Holy  Spirit,  nor  can  it  take  away  from  the  Spirit  any 
thing  which  is  attributed  to  Him  in  the  Scriptures ;  but  that 
it  only  indicates  the  order  according  to  which  the  Holy  Spirit 
disposes  and  distributes  his  acts.  I  am  not  certain  whether, 
on  the  contrary,  it  be  not  contumelious  to  the  Sjnrit  of  adop- 
tion who  dwells  in  the  hearts  of  the  regenerate^  if  he  be 
said  to  effect  in  them  a  volition  of  this  description,  from  which 
no  effect  follows,  but  which  [deficiat']  fails  or  becomes  defec- 
tive in  the  very  attempt,  being  conquered  by  the  tyranny  of 
sin  that  dwelleth  within — and  this  in  opposition  to  the  decla- 
ration in  1  John  iv,  4,  "  Greater  is  He  that  is  in  you,  than  he 
that  is  in  the  world."  Neither  do  I  think  it  to  flow  as  a  conse- 
quence from  this,  that  in  Eomans  vii,  18, 19,  the  subject  under 
investigation  is  a  man  placed  under  grace  ^  for  it  is  one 
thing  to  feel  or  perceive  some  effect  of  preparing  grace  ;  and 
it  is  another  to  be  under  grace,  or  to  to  be  ruled,  led  and  in- 
fluenced by  grace. 


YERSE  THE  TWENTIETH. 

If  he  does  that  which  he  would  not^  then  it  is  no  more  he  that 
does  it^  hut  sin  that  dwelleth  in  him,  ^ 

We  have  already  taken  the  twentieth  verse  into  considera- 
tion. But  I  here  briefly  remind  the  reader,  that  in  this  pas- 
sage, likewise,  is  manifestly  discovered  the  truth  of  our 
exposition  which  has  been  adduced ;  because,  in  this  verse,  he 
says,  both  that  he  does  what  he  would  not,  and  yet  that  he 
does  not  do  it  himself ,  but  sin  that  dwellethin  him.  He  does 
it,  therefore,  and  he  does  it  not ;  because  he  does  it  as  a  sdr- 


DISSERTATION. 


285 


vant  who  is  under  compulsion  by  his  master,  and  who  does  not 
execute  his  ow^n  will  so  much  as  that  of  his  master,  though 
it  is  also  his  own,  otherwise  he  would  not  perform  it ;  for  he 
consents  to  the  will  of  his  master  before  he  performs  it,  because 
he  does  it  without  co-action  or  force  ;  for  the  will  cannot  be 
forced. 


YERSE  THE  TWENTY-FIEST. 

He  finds  that^  when  he  would  do  good,  evil  is  present  with 
him. 

Thb  twenty-first  verse  contains  a  conclusion  from  the  pre- 
ceding, accommodated  to  the  purpose  of  the  apostle  upon 
which  he  is  here  treating.  For,  from  the  circumstance  of  this 
man  knowing  that  "  to  will  is  present  with  him"  but  not  to 
perform  it,  he  concludes,  that  "when  he  would  do  good,  evil 
is  present  with  him."  But  it  must  be  observed,  that,  in  the 
eighteenth  verse,  the  apostle  employs  the  same  phrase  about 
willing^  as  he  here  uses  about  evil  /  and  thus  he  says,  that 
both  to  will  good,  and  to  will  evil,  are  present  with  him,  or 
[adjacent']  lie  close  to  him.  And  as  "  to  will  that  which  is 
good  is  present  with  him"  through  his  inclination  for  the  law, 
and  through  his  mind  which  approves  of  it  as  "just  and  good," 
60  "  to  will  evil  is  likewise  present  with  him"  through  a  cer- 
tain law  of  sin,  that  is,  by  the  force  and  tyranny  of  sin,  assu- 
ming to  itself  the  power,  and  usurping  the  right  or  jurisdiction 
over  this  man. 

We  must  now  consider  whether  the  presence  and  adjacency 
of  each  (if  I  may  employ  such  a  word)  are  of  equal  power ;  or 
whether  the  one  prevails  over  the  other,  and  which  of  them  it 
is  that  acquires  this  ascendancy.  It  is  manifest  that  the  two 
are  not  equally  potent,  but  that  the  one  prevails  over  the 
other,  and  that,  in  fact,  "evil  is  present"  in  a  more  powerful 
and  vehement  manner :  For  that  obtains  and  prevails  in  a 
man,  through  the  command,  instigation  and  impulse  of  which 


286 


JATVTES  ARMINTUS. 


he  is  found  to  act  and  to  cease  from  acting.  But  I  wisli  to 
see  it  explained  from  the  Scriptures,  bow  such  an  assertion  as 
this  can  be  made  with  truth  concernino^  a  reeienerate  man  who 
is  pbxced  under  grace  ;  for,  in  every  passage,  the  sacred 
records  seem  to  me  to  affirm  the  contrary. 


DISSERTATION. 


287 


THE  TWEN'TY-SECON'D  AISTD  TWENTY-THIRD 
YERSES. 

1.  He  delights  in  the  law  of  God^  or  he  finds  a  kind  of  con- 
deledation  with  it^  after  the  inward  man  •  hut  lie  sees 
another  law  in  his  'members^  warring  against  the  law  of 
his  mind^  6^c.  2.  An  argument^  from  the  twenty-second 
verse^  for  the  contrary  opinion.  3.  An  answer  to  the 
PEOPOsiTioN  in  this  argument.  The  inward  man  signifies 
the  MIND,  as  the  outward  man  signifies  the  body.  (1 .)  This 
is  shewn  from  the  etymology  of  the  word.,  and  from  the 
usage  of  Scripture^  especially  in  2  Cor.  iv,  16,  and  in 
Eplies.  iii,  16,  17.  (2.)  Proofs  of  this  are  given  at  great 
length  from  the  ancient  Christian  fathers.  (3.)  Similar 
'proofs  are  adduced  from  modern  divines.  4.  The  mean- 
ing of  the  phrase^  "  to  delight  in  the  law  of  God  after  the 
inward  man?''  5.  An  answer  to  the  assumption,  which  is 
shewn  to  he  proposed  in  a  mutilated  form^  by  the  omission 
of  those  things  which  are  mentioned  in  the  twenty-third 
verse.  6.  An  argument.^  from  the  twenty-third  verse.,  for 
the  contrary  opinion.  (1.)  An  answer  to  the  proposition  in 
it.  (2.)  And  to  the  assumption.  7.  A  most  irrefragable 
argument  deduced  from  these  two  verses.  (1.)  To  the  Refu- 
tation of  the  contrary  opinion.  (2.)  To  the  establishment 
of  the  true  one^  which  at  first  is  proposed  in  an  ample  man- 
ner^ and  afterwards  in  an  abridged  fonn.  (3.)  The 'propo- 
sition is  proved  by  three  reasons^  which  are  cor^firmed 
against  all  objections.  (4.)  It  is  proved  from  the  Scrip- 
tures., that.,  in  the  conflict  against  sin.,  the  regenerate  usu- 
ally obtain  the  conquest.  8.  A  special  consideration  of  the 
text.,  Gal.  V,  16-18,  and  a  collation  of  it  with  this  passage. 
9.  All  objection.,  and  a  reply  to  it.  10.  An  objection  to  the 
third  reason.,  and  a  reply.  11.  A  consideration  of  Isaiah. 
Ixiv,  10. 

1.  In  the  twenty-second  and  twenty-third  verses  is  adduced 
a  clearer  explanation  and  proof  of  the  conclusion  which  had 


288 


JAMES  ARMnrrus. 


been  drawn  in  the  twenty-first  verse,  and  which  agrees  with 
the  very  topic  that  the  apostle  had,  in  this  part,  proposed  to 
himself  for  investigation.  But  the  proof  is,  properly,  con- 
tained in  the  twenty-third  verse  ;  because  that  verse  corres- 
ponds with  these  'words,  "  When  I  w^ould  do  good,  evil  is 
present  with  me,"  an  afiirmation  which  was  to  be  proved. 
The  proof  is  taken  from  the  effect  of  the  evil  which  is  present 
with  the  man^  and  it  is  the  warfare  against  the  law  of  his 
mindy  the  victory  obtained  over  him,  and,  after  such  victory, 
the  captivity  of  the  man  to  the  law  of  sin.  The  twenty-second 
verse  has  reference  to  these  words,  "  When  I  would  do  good 
and  it  contains  a  more  ample  explanation  of  this  willing,  from 
the  proper  cause,  and  an  illustration  of  the  following  verse 
from  things  diverse  and  disjunctive.  But  in  these  two  verses 
is  contained  one  axiom,  which  is  appropriately  called  a  dis- 
crete or  disjunctive  axiom  /  as  is  apparent  from  the  use  of  the 
particle,  ^c,  "but,"  in  the  twenty-third  verse,  which  is  the 
relative  of  .atv,  though  the  latter  is  omitted  in  the  twenty-third 
verse.  It  is  likewise  apparent  from  the  very  form  of  opposi- 
tion. The  antecedent  and  less  yrincijpal  part  of  this  axiom  is 
contained  in  the  twenty-second  verse ;  the  consequent  and 
principal  part,  in  the  twenty-third.  For  the  antecedent  is 
employed  for  the  illustration  of  the  consequent,  as  is  very 
manifest  in  all  axioms.  Thus,  as  in  many  similar  instances, 
"  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water  unto  repentance ;  but  He 
that  Cometh  after  me,  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  Avith  fire."  (Matt,  ii,  11.)  "Though  our  outward  man 
perish,  yet  the  inward  man  is  renewed  day  by  day."  (2  Cor. 
iv,  16.)  For  the  particles,  indeed^  though,  since,  when,  &c., 
denote  the  antecedent  and  less  principal  part  of  the  axiom ; 
while  the  particles,  hut,  yet,  then,  &c.,  denote  the  consequent 
and  principal  part.  "  To  delight  in  the  law  of  God,"  or,  "  to 
find  a  sort  of  condelectation  in  it,"  "  after  the  inward  man," 
is  the  cause  that  to  will  is  present  with  this  man.  "  The  evil 
which  is  present  with  him,"  is  "  the  law  of  sin  in  his  mem- 
bers." The  effect,  by  which  the  presence  of  this  evil  is  proved, 
is  contained  in  these  words,  "  Warring  against  the  law  of  my 


DISSERTATION. 


289 


mind,  and  bringing  rae  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin  which 
is  in  my  members." 

I  have  considered  it  proper  to  offer  these  remarks,  to  assist 
in  forming  a  right  judgment  about  a  discrete  or  disjunctive 
axiom,  ]est  any  one  should  separate  the  one  part  from  the 
other,  and  should  account  the  less  principal  to  be  the  princi- 
pal one.  Let  us  now  further  see  what  conclusion  can  be 
drawn  from  these  two  verses,  in  proof  of  the  one  opinion  or  of 
the  other. 

2.  Those  who  hold  sentiments  contrary  to  mine,  draw  the 
following  conclusion,  from  the  twenty-second  verse,  for  the  es- 
tablishment of  their  view  of  the  subject : 

He  who  delights  in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man,  is 
regenerate  and  placed  under  grace ; 

But  this  man  about  whom  the  apostle  is  treating  delights  in 
the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man  ; 

Therefore,  this  man  is  regenerate  and  placed  under  grace. 

They  suppose  that,  in  the  proposition,  they  have  a  two-fold 
foundation  for  their  opinion  :  (i.)  Because  "  the  inward tnarC* 
is  attributed  to  this  person,  (ii.)  Because  that  same  individual 
is  said  "  to  delight  in  the  laio  of  God  after  the  inward  man." 
For,  they  say,  both  these  adjuncts  can  appertain  to  regenerate 
persons  alone.  The  first  agrees  with  them  only,  because,  in 
the  Scriptures,  "  the  inward  man"  has  the  same  signification 
as  that  of  new  man  and  the  regenerate  the  second, 
because  it  is  declared  concerning  the  pious,  that  "  they  medi- 
tate in  the  law  of  the  Lord,  and  that  their  delight  is  in  it,  day 
and  night." 

3.  To  the  proposition,  I  reply,  first,  that  the  inward  man 
is  not  the  same  as  the  new  man  or  the  regenerate^  either 
from  the  etymology  of  the  word,  or  from  the  usage  of  Scrip- 
ture ;  and  the  inward  man  is  not  peculiar  to  the  regenerate, 
but  tliat  it  also  belongs  to  the  unregenerate.  Secondly,  that 
to  delight  in  the  law  of  God^  or,  rather,  to  find  a  sort  of  con- 
delectation  in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man,,  is  not  a 
property  peculiar  to  the  regenerate  and  to  those  who  are  placed 
under  grace,  but  that  it  appertains  to  a  man  placed  under  the 
law. 


290 


JAMES  ARMnaus. 


(1.)  "With  regard  to  the  first,  I  saj,  (i,)  from  the  etymology 
of  the  epithet,  he  is  called  the  inward  man^  relatively  and  op- 
positely to  the  outward  man.  For  there  are  two  men  in  the 
same  individual,  the  one  existing  within  the  other,  and  the 
one  having  the  other  first  within  himself.  The  first  of  these 
is  the  hidden  man  of  the  heai't^  (Peter  iii,  4,)  the  second  is  the 
outward  man  of  the  hody  /  the  former  is  he  who  inhabits  or 
dwells  in,  the  latter,  he  who  is  inhabited  ;  the  former  is  calcu- 
lated or  adapted  to  invisible  and  incorporeal  \hona'\  blessings, 
the  latter,  to  those  which  are  earthly  and  visible  ;  the  former 
is  immortal,  the  latter  is  mortal  and  liable  to  death.  In  these 
two  words,  not  a  single  syllable  occurs  which  can  aflford  even 
the  least  indication  of  regeneration  and  of  the  newness  arising 
from  regeneration.  But  these  three  epithets,  the  inward  man, 
the  regenerate  man,  and  the  new  man,  hold  the  following 
order  among  each  other,  which  the  words  themselves  indi- 
cate at  the  first  sight  of  them.  The  inward  man  denotes  the 
subject.,  the  regenerate  man  denotes  the  act.,  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
who  regenerates  ;  and  the  new  man  denotes  the  quality  which 
exists  in  the  inward  man  through  the  act  of  regeneration. 

(ii.)  The  sense  and  usage  of  Scripture  are  not  adverse  to  this 
signification,  but,  on  the  contrary,  are  very  consentaneous  to 
it.  This  will  be  apparent  from  a  diligent  consideration  of 
those  passages  in  which  mention  is  made  of  "  the  inward 
man."  One  of  them  is  the  text  now  under  discussion ;  the 
second  is  2  Cor.  iv,  16  ;  and  the  third  is  Ephes.  iii,  16,  17. 
Let  us  at  present  take  into  consideration  the  last  two  pas- 
sages. 

2  CORINTHIANS  IV,  16. 

The  former  of  the  two  is  thus  expressed  :  "for  which  cause 
we  faint  not ;  but  though  our  outward  man  perish,  yet  the 
inward  man  is  renewed  day  by  day."  From  this  verse  itself, 
I  shew  that  ths  inward  and  the  outward  man  are  not  in 
this  passage  taken  for  the  new  and  the  old  man  ;  but  that 
the  inward  man  is  to  be  understood  as  that  which  is  incor- 
poreal and  inhabiting,  so  denominated  from  the  interior  of 


DISSERTATION. 


291 


man,  that  is,  bis  mind  or  soul ;  and  that  the  outward  man  is 
here  taken  for  that  which  is  corporeal  and  inhabited,  so  de- 
nominated from  the  body,  the  exterior  part  of  man.  This  I  shew, 

First.  Because,  if  the  outward  and  the  inward  man  were 
to  be  taken  for  the  old  and  the  new  man,  then  this  disjunc- 
tive mode  of  speech  could  not  attain  in  this  verse.  For 
these  two  could  not  then  be  distinguished  in  the  following 
manner  from  each  other  :  "  Though  our  old  man  perish,  yet 
the  new  man  is  renewed  day  by  day  for  [as  there  stated] 
they  are  necessarily  cohering,  and  mutually  consequent  on 
each  other ;  because  whatever  is  taken  away  from  the  old 
man,  is  so  much  added  to  the  new.  The  absurdity  of  such  a 
distinction  will  be  still  more  manifest,  if  the  same  thing  be 
thus  proposed  :  "  Though  our  old  man  be  crucified,  destroyed 
and  buried,  yet  the  new  man  rises  again,  is  quickened  or  vivi- 
fied, and  is  renewed  still  more  and  more."  And,  "  Though 
we  lay  aside  our  former  oldness,  yet  we  make  greater  and  still 
greater  proficiency  in  newness  of  life."  Let  any  one  that 
pleases  render  himself  ridiculous  by  employing  the  following 
language:  "Though  this  youth  unlearns  and  lays  aside  his 
ignorance,  yet  he  daily  makes  a  greater  proficiency  in  the 
knowledge  of  necessary  things." 

Secondly.  The  solace  which  the  apostle  produces,  in  oppo- 
sition to  those  oppressions  and  distresses  to  which  holy  people 
are  liable,  while  they  remain  in  this  world,  consists  in  the 
following  words  :  "  The  inward  man  is  renewed  day  by  day ;" 
and  not  in  these,  "  though  our  outward  man  perish."  This  is 
shewn  by  the  mode  of  speech  adopted  by  the  apostle,  indica- 
ting that  this  very  "  perishing  of  the  outward  man,"  which  is 
efiected  through  oppressions  and  distresses,  is  that  against 
which  the  consolation,  comprehended  in  the  following  words, 
is  produced  by  the  apostle.  The  afiiicted  person  says,  "  But 
our  outward  man  is  perishing."  The  apostle  replies  to  him, 
"  Do  not  grieve  on  this  account ;  for  our  inward  man  is  re- 
newed day  by  day,  in  the  renewal  of  which  consists  our  salva- 
tion. For  we  must  not  have  regard  to  external  and  visible 
blessings,  which  conduce  to  the  life  of  the  outward  man; 
because  they  are  liable  to  perish.    But  we  must  highly  esti- 


293 


JAMES  AKMINTUS. 


mate  and  regard  internal  and  invisible  things,  which  appertain 
to  the  life  of  the  inward  man  ;  because  these  are  eternal,  and 
will  never  perish." 

But  if,  by  this  word,  "the  outward  man"  were  to  be  under- 
stood "  the  old  man,"  then  the  apostle  must  have  produced 
this  in  the  place  of  consolation, in  the  following  manner  :  "Do 
not  "  lament  that  you  are  liable  to  many  afflictions  and  op- 
pressions, for  those  are  the  very  things  by  which  your  old  man 
perishes,  and  by  which  the  inward  man  is  the  more  renewed." 
But  that  the  perishing  of  the  outward  man,  and  that  of  the 
old  man,  are  not  the  same,  is  evident  from  this  circumstance—* 
that  the  former  of  these  is  against  the  very  nature  of  man  and 
the  good  of  [animalis]  natural  life,  but  that  the  latter  is  against 
depraved  nature,  and  is  contrary  to  the  life  of  sin  in  man. 

Thirdly.  From  the  word  "  renewed^'*  it  is  apparent  that 
"  the  inward  man"  is  the  subject  of  renovation  or  renewal, 
and  of  the  act  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

I  confess  indeed,  that  it  may  be  correctly  said,  "  The  new 
man  is  daily  renewed  more  and  more,"  both  because  it  is  need- 
ful that  this  newness,  which  has  been  produced  in  a  man  by 
the  act  of  the  regenerating  Spirit,  should  increase  and  be 
augmented  day  by  day,  and  because  the  remains  of  the  old 
man  ought  by  degrees  to  be  taken  away  and  weakened  yet 
more  and  more.  But  even  in  this  case  the  subject  is  the 
inward  man^  that  is  called  new  from  the  newness  which  now 
begins  to  be  effected  in  him  by  the  regenerating  Spirit ;  for 
the  subject  of  increasing  and  progressive  renovation,  and  that 
of  commencing  renovation,  are  the  same. 

But  the  subject  of  incipient  or  commencing  renovation  is  not 
the  new  man^  (for  he  is  not  called  new  before  the  act  of  reno- 
vation, and  prior  to  the  quality  impressed  by  that  act,)  but  it 
is  the  inward  man.  Therefore,  though  the  new  man  be  said 
to  be  renewed,  (a  phrase  which  I  am  not  aware  that  the  Scrip- 
tures employ,)  yet  the  subject  is  the  inward  man,  which  subject 
may  receive  the  appellation  of  the  new  man  from  the  quality 
impressed.  As  we  say  that  a  white  man  becomes  whiter  every 
day,  whiteness  being  communicated  to  a  white  man  not  as  he 
is  white,  but  as  he  is  a  man  who  has  [nigredinis  adhuc 


DISSERTATION. 


293 


quidpiam]  still  some  dark  shades  remaining^  and  who  has 
not  yet  attained  to  that  d  gree  of  whiteness  which  he  de- 
sires. Consonantly  with  this  view,  the  Scriptures  themselves 
tise  these  words :  "  Be  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  your  mind, 
and  put  on  the  new  man,  which  after  God  is  created  in  right- 
eousness and  true  holiness,"  (Eph.  iv,  23,  24.)  In  this  pas- 
sage the  subject  of  renovation  is  called  "the  spirit  of  our 
mind,"  that  is,  the  inward  man,  or  the  mind  ;  and  "  the  new 
man,"  in  the  same  passage,  is  not  the  subject  itself,  but  it  is 
the  quality  which  the  subject  ought  to  induce :  This  quality 
is  there  called  "  righteousness  and  true  holiness." 

I  have  said  that  I  am  not  quite  certain  whether  the  Scrip- 
tures use  this  phrase  in  any  passage  :  I  have  felt  this  hesita- 
tion on  account  of  Col.  iii,  10,  in  which  it  seems  to  be  so  used  ; 
the  apostle  saying,  "  and  ye  have  put  on  the  new  man,  which 
is  renewed  in  knowledge  after  the  image  of  Him  who  created 
him."  But  it  will  be  obvious  to  every  one  who  considers  the 
passage  with  diligence,  that  these  words,  "which  is  renewed," 
or  Tov  avaxajviifxsvov,  must  be  joined  with  what  preceded,  "and 
ye  have  put  on  the  new  man,"  that  is,  "  that  which  is  renewed," 
or,  "the  renewed,"  "in  knowledge,"  &c.,  so  as  to  be  a  de- 
scription of  the  new  man,  not  some  new  attribute  of  this  new 
man.  But  to  this  criticism  no  great  importance  is  attached ; 
and  I  have  said,  I  do  not  deny  that  the  new  man  is  renewed 
more  and  more. 

The  same  thing  is  manifest  from  the  rest  of  this  passage. 
(2  Cor.  iv,  16.)  For,  "  the  outward  man,"  (16,)  "  an  earthen 
vessel,"  (7,)  "our  body,"  (10,)  "our  mortal  flesh,"  (11,)  are 
all  synonymous  terms  ;  as  are  also,  "  troubled,"  "  perplexed," 
"  pei*8ecuted,"  "  bearing  about  in  the  body  the  dying  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,"  "  delivered  unto  death,"  and  "  perishing."  This 
may  be  rendered  very  clear  to  the  studious  inquirer  after  the 
truth,  who  will  compare  the  preceding  and  the  succeeding 
verses  with  the  16th. 

EPHESiANS  m,  16,  17. 

The  latter  of  the  two  passages  is  thus  expressed  :  "  That 


m 


JAMES  AKMINIUB. 


he  would  grant  you,  according  to  the  riches  of  his  glorj,  to  be 
strengthened  with  might  by  his  Spirit  in  the  inner  man  ;  that 
Christ  may  dwell  in  your  hearts  by  faith."  From  these  verses, 
it  is  plain,  that  by  the  imier  man  is  denoted  the  subject  about 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  occupied  in  his  act  and  operation ; 
and  this  operation  is  here  denominated  ^'  a  corroboration,"  or 
"a  being  strengthened."  This  is  also  plain  from  the  syno- 
nyme  mentioned  in  the  following  verse,  "that  Christ  may 
dwell  in  your  hearts  by  faith  ;"  for  'Uhe  heart,"  and  "  the  in- 
ner man,"  are  taken  from  the  same  thing.  In  this  view  of  the 
subject  I  am  supported  by  the  very  learned  Zanchius,  who 
writes  in  the  following  manner  upon  this  passage  :  "  We  have 
asserted,  and  from  2  Cor.  iv,  16,  we  have  demonstrated,  that 
by  the  term  in  fie?-  man  is  signified  the  principal  part  of  man, 
that  is,  the  mind,  which  consists  of  the  understanding  and  the 
will,  and  which  is  usually  denoted  by  the  word  heai  t^  in  which 
the  aflections  or  passions  flourish  ;  as,  on  the  contrary,  by  the 
term  outward  man^  no  other  thing  can  be  understood  than  the 
corporeal  part  of  man,  which  [yegetatur']  grows,  possesses  sen- 
ses, locomotion,"  etc.  And  in  a  subsequent  passage,  he  says, 
"  Therefore,  by  this  particle,  in  the  imier  man^  the  apostle 
teaches,  that  as  the  gift  of  might  or  strength,  so  likewise  the 
other  virtues  of  the  Spirit,  have  not  their  seat  in  the  ve- 
getative or  growing  part  of  man,  but  in  his  mind,  heart, 
spirit,"  tfec. 

(2.)  Because  it  is  not  only  held  for  a  certainty  by  some  per- 
sons, that  "  the  inward  man"  is  the  same  with  the  new  and 
the  regenerate  inan^  from  which  they  venture  to  assert,  "  that 
the  regenerate  alane  possess  the  inward  man ;"  but  because 
this  is  also  urged  as  an  article  of  belief,  let  us  therefore  see 
what  a  great  portion  of  the  divines  of  the  Christian  church 
here  understood  by  the  epithet,  ''the  inward  majst." 


DISSERTATION. 


295 


THE  AXCIENT  FATHEES. 

CLEMENT  OF  ALEXANDRIA. 

The  apostle  gives  two  appellations  to  the  man — person 
and  his  mind.    {Strom,  lib.  8,  fol.  194.) 

TERTULLIAN. 

"  But,"  says  the  apostle,  "  though  onr  outward  man  be  de- 
stroyed," that  is,  the  flesh,  by  the  force  of  persecutions,  "  yet 
the  inward  man  is  renewed  day  by  day,"  that  is,  the  mind,  by 
the  hope  of  the  promises.    {Against  the  Gnostics.,  cap.  15.) 

Having,  therefore,  obtained  the  two  men  mentioned  by  the 
apostle — the  inward  man,  that  is,  the  mind,  and  the  outward 
man,  that  is,  the  flesh— the  heretics  have  in  fact  adjudged  sal- 
vation to  the  mind,  that  is,  to  the  inward  man,  but  destruc- 
tion to  the  flesh,  that  is,  to  the  outward  man  ;  because  it  is  re- 
corded 2  Cor.  iv,  16,  "  for  though  our  outward  man  perish," 
&c.    {On  the  Resurrection  of  the  Body^  cap.  40.) 

From  without,  wars  that  overcome  the  body ;  inwardly, 
fear  that  afllicts  the  mind.  So,  "though  our  outward  man 
perish,"  perishing  will  not  be  understood  as  losing  our  resur- 
rection, but  as  sustaining  vexation  ;  and  this,  not  without  the 
inward  man.  Thus  it  will  be  the  part  of  both  of  them  to  be 
glorified  together,  as  well  as  to  be  fellow-sufferers.  {Ibid.) 

For  though  the  apostle  calls  the  flesh  "  an  earthen  vessel," 
which  he  commands  to  be  honorably  treated  ;  yet  it  is  also 
called,  by  the  same  apostle,  "  the  outward  man,"  that  is,  the 
clay  which  was  first  \jMcisus']  impressed  and  engraved  under 
the  title  of  mem,  not  of  a  cup.,  of  a  sword.,  or  of  any  small  ves- 
sel I  for  it  was  called  "  a  vessel"  \nomine']  on  account  of  its 
capacity,  which  holds  and  contains  the  mind.  But  the  flesh 
is  called  "man,"  from  community  of  nature,  which  renders  it 
not  an  instrument  in  operations,  but  a  minister  or  assistant. 
{Ihid.  cap.  16.) 


296 


JAMES  ABMUmJS. 


AMBROSE. 

"  For  I  delight  in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man." 
He  says  that  his  mind  delights  in  those  things  which  are  de- 
livered by  the  law;  and  thus  it  is  the  inward  man.  {On 
Eom.  vii,  22.) 

"  Though  our  outward  man  perish,  yet  the  inward  man  is 
renewed  day  by  day."  The  flesh  perishes  or  wastes  away  by 
afflictions,  stripes,  famine,  thirst,  cold  and  nakedness  ;  but  the 
mind  is  renewed  by  the  hope  of  a  future  reward,  because  it  is 
purified  by  incessant  tribulations.  For  the  mind  is  profited 
in  afflctions,  and  does  not  perish ;  so  that  when  additional 
temptations  occur,  [qiwtidie  acquirat  ad  meriturri\  it  makes 
daily  advances  in  worthiness ;  because  this  "  perishing"  is 
profitable  also  to  the  body  for  its  immortality  [merito]  through 
the  excellence  of  the  mind.    {On  2  Co'r.  iv,  16.) 

"  I  delight  in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man."  Our 
inward  man  is  that  which  was  made  after  the  image  and  like- 
ness of  God  ;  the  outward  man  is  that  which  was  formed  and 
shaped  from  clay.  As  therefore  there  are  two  men,  there  is 
likewise  a  two-fold  [co7iversatio]  course  of  conduct — one  is  that 
of  the  inward  man,  the  other  that  of  the  outward  man.  And, 
indeed,  most  of  the  acts  of  the  inward  man  extend  to  the  out- 
ward man.  As  the  chasteness  of  the  inward  man  also  passes 
to  the  chastity  of  the  body.  For  he  who  is  ignorant  of  the 
adultery  of  the  heart,  is  likewise  unacquainted  with  the  adul- 
tery of  the  body,  &c.  It  is,  therefore,  the  circumcision  of  the 
inward  man  ;  for  he  who  is  circumcised  has  stripped  off  the 
enticements  of  his  whole  flesh,  as  his  foreskin,  that  he  may  be  in 
the  Spirit,  and  not  in  the  flesh ;  and  that  in  the  Spirit  he  may 
mortify  the  deeds  of  his  body,  &c.,  &c.  When  our  inward 
man  is  in  the  flesh,  he  is  in  the  foreskin.  {Letter  Y7^A,  to 
Oonstantius.) 

BASIL  THE  GREAT. 

"  Let  us  make  man  according  to  our  image."    He  means 


DISSERTATION. 


297 


the  inward  man,  when  he  says,  "  Let  ns  make  man,"  &c., 
&c.  Listen  to  the  apostle,  who  sajs,  "  Though  our  outward 
man  perish,  yet  the  inward  man  is  renewed  day  by  day." 
How  do  I  know  the  two  men  ?  One  of  them  is  apparent ;  the 
other  is  hidden  in  him  who  appears,  it  is  the  invisible,  the  in- 
ward man.  We  have  then  a  man  within  us  ;  and  we  are  two- 
fold ;  and  what  is  said  is  very  true,  that  we  are  inward. 
{Homily  10th,  on  the  six  days  of  Creation.) 

"  Thy  hands  have  made  me,  and  fashioned  me."  God  made 
the  mward  man,  and  fashioned  the  outward  man.  For  "the 
fashionino'"  belongs  to  clay  ;  but  the  making"  appertains  to 
that  which  is  after  his  own  image.  Wherefore  the  thing 
which  was  fashioned  is  the  flesh,  but  that  which  was  7nade  is 
the  mind.    {Ibid.  Homily  11.) 

Since  there  are,  indeed,  two  men,  as  the  apostle  declares, 
the  one  outward  and  the  other  inward,  we  must  also,  in  like 
manner,  receive  the  age  in  both,  according  to  him  whom  we 
behold,  and  according  to  him  whom  we  understand  in  secret. 
{Discourse  on  the  leginning  of  the  Proverls  of  Solomon.) 

CYKIL  OF  ALEXANDRIA. 

"  But  though  our  outward  man  perish,  yet  the  inward  man 
is  renewed  day  by  day."  If  any  one,  therefore,  says  that  our 
inward  man  dwells  in  the  outward  man,  he  repeats  an  impor-- 
tant  truth ;  yet  he  will  not  \ideo']  on  this  account  seem  to  di- 
vide \unurti\  the  unity  of  man.  {On  the  incarnation  of  the 
only  hegotten  Son,  cap.  12.) 

MACARIUS. 

The  true  death  consists  in  the  heart,  and  is  hidden,  when 
our  inward  man  is  dead.  If  therefore  any  one  has  passed  over 
from  death  to  the  hidden  life,  he  in  reality  lives  forever,  and 
dies  no  more,  (fee,  &c.  Sin  acts  secretly  upon  the  inward 
man  and  the  mind,  and  commences  a  conflict  with  the  thoughts. 
{Homily  15.) 

The  members  of  the  soul  are  many :  such  as  the  mind,  the 
20  VOL.  II. 


298 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


conscience,  the  will,  the  thoughts  which  accuse  or  else  defend. 
But  all  these  have  been  collected  together  into  one  reason; 
yet  they  are  the  members  of  the  soul.  But  the  soul  is  single, 
that  is,  the  inward  man.    {Homily  7.) 

"  The  inward  man"  and  "  the  soul"  are  taken  for  the  same 
thing,  in  his  27^A  Homily. 

CHRYSOSTOM. 

"  But  though  our  outward  man  perish,"  &c.  How  does  it 
perish  ?  While  it  is  beaten  with  stripes,  is  driven  away,  and 
endures  innumerable  evils.  "  Yet  the  inward  man  is  renewed 
day  by  day."  How  is  it  renewed  ?  By  faith,  hope  and  alac- 
rity, that  it  may  have  the  courage  to  oppose  itself  to  evils. 
For,  the  more  the  evils  which  the  body  endures,  the  greater  is 
the  hope  which  the  inward  man  entertains,  and  the  more 
bright  and  resplendent  does  it  become,  as  gold  which  is  ex- 
amined or  tested  by  much  fire.    {On  2  Cor.  iv,  16.) 

Let  us  now  see  what  is  said  by  one  who  stands  higher 
than  many: 

AUGUSTINE. 

But  who,  except  the  greatest  mad  man,  will  say  that  in  the 
body  we  are,  or  shall  afterwards  be,  like  God  ?  That  likeness^ 
therefore,  exists  in  the  inward  man,  "  which  is  renewed  in  the 
knowledge  of  God,  after  the  image  of  him  that  created  him." 
(Tom.  2,  Ej[>ist.  6.) 

By  this  grace,  righteousness  is  written  in  the  inward  man, 
when  renewed,  which  transgression  had  destroyed.  {On  the 
Spirit  and  the  Letter^  cap.  27.) 

As  he  called  him  the  inward  man  when  coming  into  this 
world,  because  the  outward  man  is  corporeal  as  this  world  is. 
{On  the  Demerits  and  Bemission  of  Sin,  lib.  1,  cap.  25  ; 
Tom.  7.) 

As  the  eyes  of  the  body  derive  no  aid  from  the  light,  that 
they  may  depart  from  it  with  eyelids  closed  and  turned  in  an- 
other direction,  but  in  order  to  see,  they  are  assisted  by  the 


^  DISSERTATION.    ■  299 

light,  (nor  can  this  be  done  at  all,  unless  the  light  lends  its 
aid,)  so  God,  who  is  the  light  of  the  inward  man,  assists  [oh- 
Tutuiri]  the  drowsiness  of  our  mind,  that  we  may  perform 
something  that  is  good,  not  according  to  our  righteousness, 
but  according  to  his  own.    {Ihid.  lib.  2,  cap.  5.) 

If,  in  the  mind  itself,  wdiich  is  "  the  inward  man,"  perfect 
newness  were  formed  in  baptism,  the  apostle  would  not  de- 
clare, "Though  our  outward  man  perish,  yet  the  inward  man 
is  renewed  day  by  day."    {Hid.  cap.  Y.) 

As  that  tree  of  life  was  placed  in  the  corporeal  Paradise,  so 
this  wisdom  is  in  the  spiritual  Paradise,  the  former  of  them 
affording  vital  vigor  to  the  senses  of  the  outward  man,  the  lat- 
ter to  those  of  the  inward  man,  without  any  change  of  time 
for  the  worse.    {Ibid.  caj).  21.) 

Behold,  then,  of  how  many  things  are  we  ignorant — not 
only  such  as  are  past,  but  also  of  those  which  are  present,  con- 
cerning our  nature,  and  not  only  in  reference  to  the  body,  but 
likewise  in  reference  to  the  inward  man ;  yet  we  are  not  com- 
pared to  the  beasts.  {Tom.  7.  On  the  Soul  and  its  Origin, 
lib.  4,  cap.  8.) 

Because  the  thing  is  either  the  foot  itself,  the  body,  or  the 
man,  who  hobbles  along  with  a  lame  foot ;  yet  the  man  can- 
not avoid  a  lame  foot,  unless  he  have  it  healed.  This  can  also 
be  done  in  the  inward  man,  but  it  must  be  by  the  grace  of 
God  through  ejesus  Christ.  {On  Perfection  against  Ccelestius^ 
fol.  1,  letter  /.) 

Thus  also  the  mind  is  the  thing  of  the  inward  man,  robbery 
is  an  act,  avarice  is  a  vice,  that  is,  a  quality,  according  to 
which  the  mind  is  evil,  even  when  it  does  nothing  by  which 
it  can  render  any  service  to  avarice  or  robbery.  {Ibid.) 

Beside  the  inward  and  the  outward  man,  I  do  not  indeed 
perceive  that  the  apostle  makes  another  inward  of  the  inward 
man,  that  is,  the  innermost  of  the  whole  man.  [On  the  Mind 
and  its  Origin^  lib.  4,  cap.  4.) 

He  confesses  in  the  same  passage,  that  the  mind  is  the  in- 
ward man  to  the  body,  but  he  denies  that  the  spirit  is  the  in- 
ward man  to  the  mind. 

Some  persons  have  also  made  this  supposition,  that  now  the 


soo 


J'AMES  ARMINIUS. 


inward  man  was  made,  but  the  body  of  the  man  afterwards, 
when  the  Scriptm-e  says,  "  And  God  formed  man  of  the  dust 
of  the  ground."    (Tom.  3.    On  Genesis  according  to  the- 
letter,  1.  3,  c.  22.) 

The  apostle  Paul  Welshes  "  the  inward  man"  to  be  under- 
stood b}^  the  spirit  ot  the  mind,  "the  outward  man"  in  the 
body  and  this  mortal  life.  Yet  it  is  sometimes  read  in  his 
epistles,  that  he  has  not  called  both  of  these  together  "  two 
men,"  but  one  entire  man  whom  God  made,  that  is,  both  that 
which  is  the  inward  man,  and  that  which  is  the  outward. 
But  he  does  not  make  him  after  his  own  image,  except  with 
regard  to  that  which  is  inward,  not  only  what  is  incorporeal, 
but  also  what  is  rational,  and  which  is  not  within  beasts. 
{Tom..  6.    Against  Faustus  the  Manichee,  lib.  24,  cap.  1.) 

Behold  God  is  likewise  proclaimed,  by  the  same  apostle,  as 
former  of  the  outvrard  man.  "  But  now  hath  God  set  the 
members  every  one  in  the  body  as  it  hath  pleased  him." 

The  apostle  says  that  "  the  old  man"  is  nothing  more  than 
the  old  [course  of]  Z//e,  which  is  in  sin,  and  in  which  men  live 
according  to  the  first  Adam,  concerning  whom  he  declares, 
"  By  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death  by  sin,  and 
so  death  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  have  sinned."  There- 
fore, the  whole  of  that  man,  both  in  his  outward  and  inward 
part,  has  become  old  on  account  of  sin,  and  is  sentenced  to 
the  punishment  of  mortality,  &c.  {IMd.) 

And  therefore,  by  such  a  cross,  the  body  of  sin  is  emptied, 
that  we  may  "  not  now  yield  our  members  as  instruments  of 
unrighteousness  unto  sin  ;"  because  this  inward  man  also,  if 
he  be  really  renewed  day  by  day,  is  certainly  old  before  he  is 
renewed.  For  that  is  an  inward  act  of  which  the  apostle 
speaks  thus :  "  Put  off  the  old  man,  and  put  on  the  new  manP 
{Tom.  3.    On  the  Trinity,  lib.  4,  caf.  3.) 

But  now  the  death  of  the  flesh  of  our  Lord  belongs  to  the 
example  of  the  death  of  our  outward  man,  &c.  And  the  res- 
urrection of  the  body  of  the  Lord  is  found  to  appertain  to  the 
example  of  the  resurrection  of  our  outward  man."  {Ihid.) 

Come  now,  let  us  see  where  is  that  which  bears  some  re- 


DISSERTATION. 


301 


semblance  to  the  confines  of  the  man,  both  the  outward  and 
the  inward  ;  for,  whatever  we  have  in  the  mind  in  common 
with  the  beasts,  is  correctly  said  still  to  belong  to  the  outward 
man  ;  for  not  only  will  the  body  be  accounted  as  "  the  outward 
man,"  but  likewise  certain  things  united  to  its  life,  by  which 
the  joints  of  the  body  and  all  the  senses  flourish  and  grow,  and 
with  which  it  is  furnished  for  entering  upon  outward  things. 
"When  the  images  of  these  perceptions,  infixed  in  the  memory, 
are  revisited  by  recollection,  the  matter  is  still  a  transaction 
which  belongs  to  the  outward  man.  And  in  all  these  things 
we  are  at  no  great  distance  from  the  cattle,  except  that  in  the 
shape  of  our  bodies  we  are  not  bending  downwards,  but  erect. 
{On  the  Trinity^  lib.  12,  ca'p.  1.) 

While  ascending,  therefore,  inwardly  by  certain  degrees  of 
consideration  through  the  parts  of  the  mind,  another  thing  be- 
gins from  this  to  occur  to  us,  which  is  not  common  to  us  with 
the  beasts ;  thence  reason  has  its  commencement,  that  the  in- 
ward man  may  not  be  known.    {Ihid.  cap.  8.) 

Both  believers  and  unbelievers  are  well  acquainted  with  the 
nature  of  man,  whose  outward  part,  that  is,  the  body,  they 
have  learned  the  lights  of  the  body ;  but  they  have  learned 
the  inward  part,  that  is,  the  mind,  within  themselves.  {Ihid. 
lib.  13,  mj).  1.) 

Besides,  the  Scriptures  thus  attest  it  to  us  in  this  that,  when 
these  two  things  also  are  joined  together  and  the  man  lives, 
and  when  likevv^ise  they  bestow  on  each  of  them  the  appella- 
tion of  man^  calling  the  mind  "  the  inward  man,"  but  the  body 
"  the  outward  man,"  as  though  they  were  two  men,  while  both 
of  them  together  are  only  one  man.  {Tom.  5.  On  the  City 
of  God,  lib.  13,  ccqy.  24.    See  also  lib.  11,  cajj.  27  <&  3.) 

As  this  outward  and  visible  world  nourishes  and  contains 
the  outward  man,  so  that  invisible  world  contains  the  inward 
man.    (Jbm.  8.    On  the  Fh^st  Psalm.) 

He  y/ho  believes  in  Him,  eats  and  is  invisibly  fattened,  be- 
cause he  is  also  invisibly  born  again.  The  infant  is  within, 
the  new  man  is  within  ;  where  young  and  tender  vines  are 
planted,  there  are  they  filled  and  satiated.  {On  John^  Tract 
26.) 


302 


JAMES  ARMINIIJS. 


THEOPHYLACT. 

Moreover,  "  the  outward  man,"  that  is,  the  body,  "  per- 
ishes." How  is  this  ?  While  it  is  beaten  with  stripes,  while 
it  is  driven  about.  "  But  the  inward  man,"  that  is,  the  spirit 
and  the  mind,  "is  renewed."  By  what  means?  When  it 
hopes  well,  and  freely  acts,  as  though  suffering  and  rejoicing 
on  account  of  God.    {On  2  Oor.  iv,  16.) 

YIGILIUS. 

Let  us  spiritually  advert  to  the  spiritual  expressions  of  the 
apostle,  by  which  he  testifies,  that  he  has  seen  and  handled  the 
word  of  God,  not  with  his  bodily  eyes  and  hands,  but  with  the 
members  of  the  inner  man.    {Against  Eiityches^  lib.  4.) 

PEOCOriUS  OF  GAZA. 

The  substance  of  man,  if  you  consider  his  inward  man,  is 
this  image  of  God  ;  if  you  take  his  outward  man  into  consid- 
eration, his  substance  will  be  the  earth,  or  the  dust  of  the 
ground.  Yet  one  and  the  same  is  the  man  in  the  composition 
which  is  completed  from  both  of  them.    {On  Genesis^  cap.  1.) 

BERNARD. 

As  the  outward  man  is  recognized  by  his  countenance,  so  is 
the  inward  man  pointed  out  by  his  will.  {Sermon  3,  On  As- 
censioii  Day.) 

LEO  THE  GREAT. 

When  the  outward  man  is  slightly  afflicted,  let  the  in- 
ward man  be  refreshed  ;  and  withdrawing  corporeal  lullness 
from  the  flesh,  let  the  mind  be  strengthened  by  spiritual  de- 
lights.   {Semion  4,  On  Quadragesima  Sunday) 


DISSERTATION. 


303 


GREGORY  NAZIANZEN. 

But  in  this,  our  nature,  every  care  is  towards  the  inward 
man  of  the  heart,  and  every  desire  is  directed  to  it.  {Apology 
for  his  flight.) 

GREGORY  NYSSEN. 

Let  us  make  man  in  our  image.^  after  our  likeness.  God 
speaks  thus  respecting  the  inward  man.  "  But,"  jou  will  say, 
"  you  are  giving  a  dissertation  upon  reason.  Shew  us  man 
after  the  image  of  God.  Is  reason  the  man  ?"  Listen  to  the 
apostle:  Though  your  outward  man  ^erish^  yet  the  inward 
man  is  renewed  day  hy  day.  By  what  means  ?  I  own  that 
man  is  two-fold,  one  who  is  seen,  another  who  is  hidden,  and 
whom  he  that  is  seen  does  not  perceive.  We  have,  therefore, 
an  inward  man,  and  in  some  degree  are  two-fold.  For  I  am 
that  man  who  is  inward  ;  but  I  am  not  those  things  which  are 
outward,  but  they  are  mine.  Neither  am  I  the  hand,  but  I  am 
the  reason  which  is  in  the  mind  ;  but  the  hand  is  a  part  of  the 
outward  man.    {On  Genesis^  i,  26.) 

Thus,  when  the  inward  man,  whom  God  denominates  the 
hearty  has  wiped  off  the  rusty  filth  which,  on  account  of  his 
depraved  thirst,  had  grown  up  with  his  form ;  he  will  once 
more  recover  the  likeness  [of  God]  with  his  original  and  prin- 
cipal form,  when  he  will  become  good.    {On  the  Beatitudes.) 


(3.)  MODEEIS^  DIYINES. 

Let  us  now  see  the  opinions  of  certain  divines  of  our  own 
age  and  religious  profession,  on  the  inward  man. 

CALVIN. 

Though  the  reprobate  do  not  proceed  so  far  with  the  chil- 
dren of  God,  as,  after  the  casting  down  of  the  flesh,  to  be  re- 


304 


JA^IES  ABMINroS. 


newed  in  tlie  inner  man,  and  to  liourisii  again.  {Instit.  lib. 
2,  cap.  7,  sect.  9.) 

But  the  reprobate  are  terrified,  not  because  their  inward 
mind  is  moved  or  affected,  but  because,  as  by  a  bridle  cast 
upon  them,  they  refrain  less  from  outward  w^ork,  and  inwardly 
curb  their  own  depravity,  which  they  would  otherwise  have 
shed  abroad.    {Ihid.  sect.  10.) 

Besides,  since  we  have  already  laid  down  a  two-fold  regi- 
men in  man,  and  as  we  have,  in  another  place,  said  enough 
about  the  other,  which  is  placed  in  the  mind,  or  the  inward 
man,  and  which  has  reference  to  life  eternal,  &c.  {Ihid.  lib. 
4,  cap.  20,  sect.  1.) 

Though  the  glory  of  God  shines  forth  in  the  outward  man, 
yet  the  proper  seat  of  it  is  undoubtedly  in  the  mind.  {Ibid, 
lib.  1,  cap.  15,  sect.  3.) 

Some  persons  perversely  and  un skillfully  confound  the  out- 
ward man  with  the  old  man.  For  the  old  man,  about  whom 
the  apostle  treats  in  Romans  vi,  6,  is  something  far  different. 
In  the  reprobate,  also,  the  outward  man  perishes,  but  without 
any  counterbalancing  compensation.    {On  2  Cor.  iv,  16.) 

BEZA. 

— Is  renewed,  that  is,  acquires  fresh  strength,  lest  the  out- 
ward man,  who  is  sustained  by  the  strength  of  the  inward 
man,  should  be  broken  when  assaulted  with  fresh  evils,  for 
which  reason,  the  apostle  said,  in  the  12th  verse,  "  So,  then, 
death  worketh  in  us."    (O/i  2  Cor.  iv.  16.) 

BUCEE. 

In  holy  persons,  likewise,  there  are  two  men,  an  inward  and 
an  outward  one.  St.  Paul  says,  "  Though  our  outward  man 
perish,  yet  the  inward  man  is  renewed  day  by  day."  As, 
therefore,  man  is  two-fold,  so,  likewise,  are  his  judgment  and 
his  will  two-fold — a  fact  which  our  Lord  himself  was  not 
ashamed  to  confess,  when  he  said  to  his  Father,  "  neverthe- 
less, not  my  will,  but  thine,  be  done."    By  saying  this,  "  not 


DISSE2TATI0N. 


805 


what  I  will,  but  what  thou  wiliest,  be  done,"  he  undoubtedly 
shewed  that  he  willed  what  the  Father  willed  ;  and  yet,  at  the 
same  time,  he  acknowledges  that  this  was  his  will :  "  Heraove 
this  cup  from  me."  Our  Lord,  therefore,  acknowledges  the  ex- 
istence within  himself  of  two  wills,  one  of  which  was  appa- 
rently at  variance  with  the  other.    (O/i  Romans  v.  Fol.  261.) 

FRAXCIS  JUNIUS. 

The  outward  man  hears  the  word  of  God  outwardly,  but  the 
inward  man  hears  it  inwardly.  {On  the  Three  Verities^  lib.  3, 
cap.  2.  fol.  182.) 

But  then,  as  in  ecclesiastical  administration,  not  only  the 
inward  man  is  informed  in  the  knowledge  of  God,  but  as  aids 
and  \ministeria']  services  are  also  sought  by  the  outward  man, 
so  far  as  the  external  signs  of  the  communion  of  saints  are 
required  to  feed  and  promote  the  inward  communion,  in  this 
cause,  likewise,  we  acknowledge  that  God  has  delegated  his 
authority  to  the  magistrate.    {On  Ecclesiast.  lib.  3,  caj).  5.) 

PISCATOE. 

The  outward  man,  that  is,  the  body,  as  he  had  previously 
called  .'t.  The  inward  man,  that  is,  the  soul  or  mind.  {On 
2  Cor.  iv,  16.) 

THE  CHUSCII  OF  HOLLA^^D. 

"VYhen,  indeed,  from  the  depraved  heart,  and  from  the  in- 
ward man,  evil  fruits  do  proceed,  a  necessary  consequence  of 
this  is  that  he  who  is  desirous  of  boasting  that  he  is  pure , 
must  demonstrate  the  truth  of  his  assertion  by  a  spontaneous 
approval  of  the  commands  of  Christ,  and  by  a  willing  obedi- 
ence to  them.  {A  jpamj)lilet^  in  wJdch  they  give  a  reason  for 
the  excoraiminication  of  Koolhaes.    Fol.  93.) 


306 


JAMES  AUMmiUS. 


JOHN  DEIEDO. 

The  inward  man  is  the  rational  mind  unfolded  in  its  powers, 
which  never  perishes.  But  the  body,  adorned  with  its  senses, 
is  called  "  the  outward  man,"  or  "  our  man  who  is  outward 
and  corruptible,"  as  the  apostle  says  in  2  Cor.  iv.  16,  "  though 
our  outward  man  perish,  yet  the  inv/ard  man  is  renewed  day 
by  day."  Again,  he  says,  in  Romans  vii,  22,  "  I  delight  in 
the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man."  {OnGrace  and  Free 
Will.    Fol  262.) 

The  apostle  Paul  frequently  does  not  understand  the  same 
thing  by  "  the  old  man"  and  by  the  outward  man,"  nor  has 
he  signified  the  same  thing  by  "  the  new  man"  and  by  "  the 
inward  man  ;"  but  in  the  inward  man  are  found  both  the  old 
and  the  new  man.  For,  in  the  mind,  oldness  of  this  kind  is 
formed  at  the  same  time  as  newness.  In  it,  the  likeness  is 
either  heavenly  or  earthly,  that  is,  either  a  carnal  will,  living 
according  to  the  exciting  fuel  of  sin,  or  a  spiritual  will,  living 
according  to  the  Spirit  of  God.  {Ihid.) 


I  AM  aware  that  the  divines  of  our  profession  frequently 
take  "  the  inward  man"  for  the  regenerate  and  the  new  man  / 
but  then  they  do  not  consider  "  the  inward  man,"  except  with 
a  certain  quality  infused  into  it  by  the  Holy  and  Regenerating 
Spirit,  with  which  quality,  when  the  inward  man  is  consider- 
ed, he  is  then  correctly  called  regenerate  and  a  new  man. 
If  any  one  urges  that  the  very  designation  of  "  the  inward 
man"  possesses,  of  itself,  as  great  a  value  with  those  divines 
as  do  the  titles  of  "  the  regenerate"  and  "  the  new  man,"  I 
shall  desire  him  to  demonstrate,  by  sure  and  stable  arguments, 
that  the  meaning  adopted  by  those  divines  is  conformable  to 
truth. 

4.  Let  us  now  approach  to  the  other  foundation,  which  is 
that  this  man,  to  whom  it  is  attributed  that  "  he  delights  in 
the  law  of  God,"  is  regenerate ;  and  that  this  attribute  can 
agree  with  no  other  than  a  regenerate  person.    That  we  may 


piSSERTATIOIf. 


307 


be  able  to  clear  up  this  matter  in  a  satisfactory  manner,  we 
must  see  what  is  meant  by  this  phrase,  "  to  delight  in  the  law 
of  God;"  or  "  to  feel  a  joint  delight  with  the  law  of  God,"  as 
it  appears  the  Greek  text  is  capable  of  being  rendered,  and  as 
an  ancient  version  has  it ;  for  the  verb,  (fwriSo^at^  seems  to  sig- 
nify the  7nutual  pleasure  which  subsists  between  this  man  and 
the  law,  and  by  which  not  only  this  man  feels  a  joint  delight 
in  the  law,  but  the  law  also  feels  a  similar  delight  in  him. 

"  I  feel  a  joint  delight  with  the  law  of  God,"  that  is,  I  de- 
light with  the  law  :  the  same  things  are  pleasing  to  »j  e  as  are 
pleasing  to  the  law.  This  interpretation  may  be  illustrated 
and  confirmed  by  a  comparison  of  similar  phrases,  which  fre- 
quently occur  in  other  passages  of  the  New  Testament ;  2uva- 
^wvitfatf^aj  fj.o{,  "  that  ye  strive  together  with  me  in  your  prayers 
to  God  for  me" — Suvava-rauCWiaaj  u'xiv,  "  that  I  may  with  you  be 
refreshed,  (Rom.  xv,  30,  32) — 2uv7i^)X^i(rav  f^of,  "those  women  who 
labored  with  me  in  the  gospel,"  (Phil,  iv,  3) — Su^Afxaprupsi  tcj 
■c^vsufxarj  ufjowv,  "  the  Spirit  itself  beareth  witness  with  our  spirit 
that  we  are  the  children  of  God,"  (Rom.  viii,  16,)  from  which 
St.  Chrysostom  not  inappropriately  explains,  "  I  feel  a  joint 
delight  with  the  law,"  by  this  paraphrase,  "  I  assent  to  the  law 
that  it  is  well  applied,  as  the  law,  also,  in  return,  assents  to  me, 
that  it  is  a  good  thing  for  a  man  to  will  to  do  it."  He  takes 
this  explanation  of  the  phrase  from  the  text  itself,  which  kind 
of  interpretation  not  only  may  obtain,  but  likewise  ought  to 
be  employed,  in  this  passage,  since  there  is  no  other  in  the 
whole  of  the  Scriptures  in  which  this  same  phrase  is  used. 

If  any  one  wishes  to  attach  the  same  meaning  to  the  phrase 
as  to  that  which  is  used  in  Ps.  i,  2,  "  But  his  delight  is  in  the 
law  of  the  Lord  ;"  let  him  who  says  this,  know  that  it  is  in- 
cumbent on  him  to  produce  proof  for  his  assertion.  This  is 
not  unreasonably  required  of  him,  because  the  antecedents 
and  the  consequences  which  are  attributed  to  the  man  who  is 
denoted  in  the  first  Psalm  and  described  as  being  blessed^  are 
not  only  vastly  different  from  those  things  which  are  attribu- 
ted to  the  man  on  whom  we  are  now  treating,  but  are  like" 
wise  quite  contrary  to  them.  Conceding,  however,  this  for 
the  sake  of  argument,  but  by  no  means  absolutely  granting 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


itj  (whicli  I  am  f\ir  from  doing,)  we  must  observe,  tliat  this 
man  [in  Eom.  vii,  23]  is  said,  not  simply  to  delight  iu  the 
law  of  God,"  or  "  to  feel  a  joint  delight  with  tlie  law  of  God," 
but  he  does  so  with  restriction  and  relatively,  that  is  "  accord- 
ing to  the  inward  man."  This  restriction  intimates  that  "the 
inward  man"  has  not  obtained  the  pre-eminence  in  this  man, 
but  that  it  is  weaker  than  the  flesh ;  as  the  latter  is  that 
wliich  hinders  it  from  being  able,  in  operation  and  reality,  to 
perform  the  law,  to  which  it  consents,  and  in  which  it  de- 
lights. 

Ee  wlio  will  compare  the  following  verse  with  this  will  per- 
ceive that  the  cause  of  that  restriction  is  the  one  which  we 
have  here  assigned.  For  in  the  subsequent  verse,  (the  23d,) 
it  is  not  said,  "  Bat  I  see  another  law  in  my  memhevs^  aceord- 
rn//  to  ivhich  I  do  not  delight  in  the  law  of  God^^  such  as  the 
opposition  onght  to  have  been,  if,  by  that  restriction,  the  apos- 
tle wished  only  to  ascribe  this  "  delighting"  to  the  man  ac- 
cord'wg  to  one  'part  of  him^  and  to  take  it  away  according  to 
the  other  part  of  him.  But  since  the  apostle  not  only  takes 
this  "  delighting"  from  the  other  j^art  of  him^  but  likewise 
attributes  it  to  the  power  of  warring  against  that  inward 
man  and  overcoming  hini^  it  is  evident  that  the  restriction 
has  been  added  on  this  account — to  shew  that,  in  the  man  who 
is  now  the  subject  of  discussion,  "  the  inward  man"  has  not 
the  dominion,  but  is,  in  fact,  the  inferior. 

Let  him  who  is  desirous  to  contradict  these  remarks,  shew 
us,  in  any  passage  in  which  regenerate  persons  are  made  the 
subject  of  investigation,  a  similar  restriction  em23loyed,  and 
adduced  for  another  purpose.  From  these  observations,  there- 
fore, it  appears  that  the  proposition  is  most  deservedly  denied. 
Let  us  now  attend  to  the  assumption. 

5.  I  say  that  the  assumption  is  proposed  in  a  mutilated 
form,  as  it  was  previously  in  the  argument  produced  from  the 
eighteenth  verse.  For  with  it,  the  apostle  joins  the  following 
verse,  in  such  a  manner  that  the  twenty -third  verse  may  be 
the  princijpal  part  of  a  compound  and  discrete  axiom,  em- 
ployed for  the  purpose  of  proving  what  the  apostle  intended. 
But  that  which  is  now  placed  in  the  assumption,  is  a  less 


DISSEETATIOIT. 


309 


principal  part,  condacing  to  the  illustration  of  tlie  other  by 
separation.  From  this,  it  follows  that  tlie  conclusion  cannot 
be  deduced  from  the  premises,  because  the  proposition  is  des- 
titute of  truth,  the  assumption  mutilated,  and  tlie  conclusion 
itself,  beyond  the  purpose  of  the  apostle  and  contrary  to  his 
design. 

6.  Let  us  see  whether  any  thing  further  can  be  brought 
trom  the  twenty-third  verse  for  the  demonstration  of  the  con- 
trary opinion. 

The  man  who  has  within  him,  beside  the  law  of  his  mem- 
bers, the  law  of  his  mind,  which  is  contrary  to  the  other,  is  a 
regenerate  man. 

Such  a  man  is  the  one  mentioned  in  this  passage  ; 

Therefore,  he  is  a  regenerate  man. 

(1.)  The  defenders  of  the  contrary  opinion  believe  the 
proposition  in  this  syllogism  to  be  true,  because  "  the  law  of 
the  mind"  is  opposed  to  "  the  law  of  the  members,"  as  it  con- 
sents to  the  law  of  God — a  quality  which  they  suppose  to 
belong  only  to  the  regenerate.  This,  tliey  think,  is  confirmed 
from  the  circumstance  that  the  same  apostle  expressly  calls  a 
certain  mind,  in  Col.  ii,  18,  "  a  fleshly  mind,"  which  he  like- 
wise calls  in  Rom.  viii,  7,  "the  carnal  mind." 

But  the  proposition  cannot  be  supported  by  these  passages; 
for  it  is  simply  false,  and  those  arguments  which  are  produced 
in  proof  of  it  are  inappropriate.  For  to  some  of  the  regenerate 
also,  (that  is,  to  those  who  are  under  the  law,  who  have  some 
knowledge  of  the  law,  who  have  thoughts  accusing  or  else  ex- 
cusing them,  and  who  know  that  concupiscence  is  sin,)  belongs 
something  beside  "  the  law  of  the  members,"  "  a  fleshly  mind," 
and  one  that  is  "  carnal,"  which  is  opposite  and  repugnant  to 
these:  And  this  is  "  the  work  of  the  law  \vritten  in  their 
hearts  ;"  wdiich  is  neither  "  the  law  of  the  members,"  "  a 
fleshly  mhid,"  nor  one  that  is  "  carnal,"  but  it  contends  with 
them.  For  a  conscience  or  consciousness  of  good  and  evil, 
which  compels  a  man,  though  in  vain,  to  good,  and  deters 
him  from  evil,  is  directly  opposed  to  "the  law  of  the  mem- 
bers" impelling  to  evil,  and  "to  the  carnal  aiFections  which 
cannot  be  subject  to  the  law  of  God."    For  this  conscience 


310 


JAMES  AEiUNICrS. 


consents  to  the  law  of  God,  aad  is  the  instrument  of  the  same 
law  even  in  an  unregenerate  man  to  accuse  and  convict  him. 
We  maj,  therefore,  be  permitted  to  deny  that  proposition,  and 
to  demand  stronger  proofs  for  it. 

(2.)  With  regard  to  the  assumption,  we  may  say  the  same 
as  we  did  about  the  assumption  in  the  previous  syllogism— 
that  it  is  not  fully  proposed,  as  it  ought  to  have  been,  and  it 
omits  those  things  which  were  joined  together  in  the  text  of 
the  apostle.  But  those  things  are  of  such  a  description,  as, 
when  added  to  the  assumption,  will  easily  point  out  the  falsity 
of  the  proposition  ;  that  is,  such  is  the  opposition  in  this  man 
between  the  law  of  the  members  and  that  of  the  mind^  that 
the  former  not  only  "  wars  against"  the  latter,  but  likewise 
obtains  the  conquest  in  the  fight ;  that  is,  "it  brings  man  into 
captivity  under  the  law  of  sin."  From  these  observations  also 
it  is  evident,  that  no  good  consequence  can  ensue  from  the 
assumption. 

7.  But  let  us  now  try,  whether  something  cannot  be  de- 
duced from  these  two  verses  for  the  establishment  of  our 
opinion.  It  appears  indeed  to  me,  that  I  can  from  them 
deduce  an  invincible  argument  for  the  refutation  of  the  con- 
trary opinion,  and  for  the  confirmation  of  my  own. 

(1.)  The  argument  in  refutation  of  the  contrary  opinion 
may  be  stated  in  the  following  manner  : 

The  law  of  the  mind  which  w^ars  against  the  law  of  the 
members,  is  conqtiered  by  the  law  of  the  members,  so  that  the 
man  "is  brought  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in 
his  members  ;"  {As  it  occurs  in  this  very  ass  age  ;) 

But  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus,  when  war- 
ring against  the  law  of  the  members,  overcomes  the  latter  ;  6Q 
that  it  liberates  the  man,  who  had  been  brought  into  captivity 
under  the  law  of  sin,  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death  :  (Eom. 
viii,  2.) 

Therefore,  the  law  of  the  Spirit  is  not  the  law  of  the  mind  ; 
neither  is  the  law  of  the  mind,  the  law  of  the  Spirit. 

This  is  evident  from  simple  inversion,  and  from  this  very 
syllogism,  the  premises  being  so  transposed,  as  for  the  assnmp- 
tioii  to  take  the  place  of  the  proposition,  and  vice  versa  ;  and, 


DISSERTATION. 


311 


therefore,  the  word  "  mind"  is  not  used  in  this  passage  for 
"  the  Spirit:' 

This  argument  is  irrefragable.  Let  him  who  is  desirous  of 
proving  the  contrary,  make  the  experiment,  and  he  will  find 
this  to  be  the  result.  But  its  peculiar  force  will  be  more  cor- 
rectly understood  towards  the  close  of  this  investigation,  in 
which  is  more  fully  explained  the  whole  of  the  matter  about 
which  the  apostle  is  here  treating. 

(2.)  For  the  confirmation  of  my  own  opinion,  I  deduce  the 
following  argument  from  these  verses  : 

That  man,  who  delights  indeed  in  the  law  of  God  after  the 
inward  man,  but  who,  with  the  law  of  his  mind  warring 
against  the  law  of  his  members,  not  only  cannot  prevail 
against  the  latter,  but  is  also  conquered  by  it  and  brought  into 
captivity  under  the  law  of  sin,  while  the  law  of  his  mind 
fruitlessly  contends  against  it,  is  an  unregenerate  man,  and 
placed,  not  under  grace,  but  under  the  law  ; 

But  though  this  man  delights  in  the  law  of  God  after  the 
inward  man,  and  though  with  the  law  of  his  mind  he  wars 
against  the  law  of  his  members  ;  yet  not  only  is  he  unable  to 
prevail  against  the  law  of  his  members,  but  he  is  likewise 
brought  into  captivity  under  the  law  of  sin  by  the  law  of  his 
members,  the  law  of  his  mind  maintaining  a  strong  but  use- 
less contest ; 

Therefore,  the  man  [described]  in  this  passage  is  unregene- 
rate, and  placed,  not  under  grace,  but  under  the  law  ; 

Or,  to  state  the  argument  in  a  shorter  form,  omitting  what- 
ever it  is  possible  to  omit — 

That  man  in  whom  the  law  of  the  members  so  wages  war 
against  the  law  of  the  mind,  as,  when  the  latter  is  overcome, 
or  at  least  while  it  offers  a  vain  resistance,  to  bring  the  man 
himself  into  captivity  under  the  law  of  sin,  is  unregenerate, 
and  placed  under  the  law  ; 

But  in  this  man,  about  whom  the  apostle  is  treating,  the 
law  of  the  members  so  wages  war  with  the  law  of  the  mind, 
as,  when  the  latter  is  overcome,  or  at  least  while  it  offers  a 
vain  resistance,  to  bring  the  man  himself  into  captivity  under 
the  law  of  sin ; 


312 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


Therefore,  this  man  is  iinregenerate  and  placed  under  the 
law. 

(3.)  The  truth  of  the  pro230sition  rests  on  these  three 
reasons : 

I.  Because  a  regenerate  man  not  only  with  the  law  of  his 
mind  wages  war  against  the  law  of  his  members,  but  he  doea 
this  principally  with  the  law  of  the  Spirit,  that  is,  by  the 
strength  and  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  for  it  is  said  in  Gal. 
V,  IT,  "The  flesh  lusteth  against  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit 
against  the  flesh." 

II.  Because  far  difi^erent  is  tiie  result  of  that  contest  which, 
by  the  strength  and  power  of  the  Spirit,  or  by  "the  law  of 
the  Spirit,"  a  regenerate  man  maintains  against  the  law  of  the 
members  and  against  the  flesh.  For  the  law  of  the  Spirit 
always  obtains  the  victory,  except  when  the  man  ceases 
from  employing  it  in  the  battle,  and  from  defending  himself 
with  it  against  the  invading  temptations  of  the  flesh,  Satan, 
and  the  world. 

III.  Because  \jio7i  convpetat]  it  is  not  an  attribute  of  a  re- 
generate man,  of  one  who  is  placed  under  grace,  to  he  brought 
into  caiMvity  under  the  law  of  sin ;  but  that,  rather,  is  his 
which  is  ascribed  to  him  in  the  second  verse  of  the  following 
chapter — "The  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  hath 
made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."  For  when 
he  was  formerly  placed  under  the  law,  he  was  in  captivity 
under  the  strength  and  power  of  sin. 

I  will  now  confirm  these  reasons  against  the  objections 
which  are,  or  which  can  be,  made  against  them. 

Against  the  first  it  may  be  objected — "Since  'the  law  of 
the  mind,'  and  '  the  law  of  the  Spirit,'  are  one,  they  are  in 
this  aVgument  unskillfully  distinguished  ;  both  because  no  one 
fights  against  the  law  of  the  members  except  by  the  law  of 
the  Spirit,  or  by  the  strength  and  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit; 
and  therefore  the  law  of  the  mind  is  the  law  of  the  Spirits 

To  this  I  reply,  it  has  already  been  proved,  that  the  law 
of  the  mind,  and  the  law  of  the  Spirit,  are  not  the  same,  and 
that  the  conscience  also  w^ages  war  against  the  law  of  the 
members  in  those  men  who  are  under  the  law. 


DISSERTATIOJSi. 


313 


Against  the  second  reason  it  may  be  objected,  "  Even 
the  regenerate  themselves  'offend  in  many  things.'  (James 
iii,  2.)  There  is  on  earth  'no  man  that  sinneth  not.'  (1 
Kings  viii,  46.)  The  regenerate  cannot  say  with  truth  '  that 
they  have  no  sin.'  (1  John  i,  8.)"  With  other  objections  simi- 
lar in  their  import. 

To  these,  I  reply,  that  I  heartily  acknowledge  all  these 
things,  but  that  I  do  not  perceive  how  by  means  of  them  the 
second  reason  can  be  weakened.  For  these  expressions  are  not 
repugnant  to  each  other — "  In  many  things  the  regenerate 
offend,"  and  "The  regenerate  most  generally  gain  the  victory 
in  the  contest  against  sin,"  that  is,  when  they  use  the  arms 
with  which  they  are  furnished  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

(4.)  If  any  one  says,  "  In  this  contest,  the  regenerate  are 
more  frequently  the  conquered  than  the  conquerors,"  I  shall 
request  him  to  explain  how  then  it  can  be  declared  concerning 
the  regenerate,  "that  they  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after 
the  Spirit ;"  for,  "to  be  the  conquered"  is  "to  fulfill  the  de- 
sires of  the  flesh ;"  and  he  who  usually  does  this,  "  walks 
after  the  flesh."  But  many  passages  of  Scripture  teach  that 
this  contest,  which  the  regenerate  maintain  against  sin  by  the 
strength  and  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  has  generally  a  feli- 
citous and  successful  termination  ;  "for  whatsoever  is  born  of 
God  overcometh  the  world ;  and  this  is  the  victory  that  overcom- 
eth  the  world,  even  our  faith.  Who  is  he  that  overcometh  the 
world,  but  he  that  believeth  Jesus  to  be  the  Son  of  God  ?" 
(1  John  v,  4,  5.)  "  Submit  yourselves  therfore  to  God  ;  resist 
the  devil,  and  he  will  flee  from  you."  (James  iv,  7.)  "  Greater 
is  He  that  is  in  you,  than  he  that  is  in  the  world."  (1  John  iv, 
4.)  "  Put  on  the  whole  armor  of  God,  that  ye  may  be  able  to 
stand  against  the  wiles  of  the  devil.  Wherefore,  take  unto 
you  the  whole  armor  of  God,  that  ye  may  be  able  to  withstand 
in  the  evil  day,  and,  having  done  all,  to  stand."  (Eph.  vi,  11, 
13.)  "  I  can  do  all  things  through  Christ  which  strengthen- 
eth  me."  (Phil,  iv,  13.)  "All  things  are  possible  to  him  that 
believeth."  (Mark  ix,  23.)  This  truth  also  is  proved,  by  va- 
rious examples,  through  the  whole  of  Heb.  xi.  "  ]N"ow  unto 
him  that  is  able  to  do  exceeding  abundantly  above  all  that  we 
21  TOL.  n. 


314 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


ask  or  think,  according  to  the  power  that  worketh  in  us,  nnto 
him  be  glory,"  &c.  (Eph.  iii,  20,  21.)  "]^ow  unto  Him  that 
is  able  to  keep  you  from  falling,"  "  and  to  present  you,  fault- 
less, before  the  presence  of  his  glory  with  exceeding  joy,  to  the 
only  wise  God  our  Savior,  be  glory,"  &c.  (Jude  24,  25.) 
"  They  that  are  after  the  Spirit,  do  mind  the  things  of  the 
Spirit.  If  ye,  through  the  Spirit,  do  mortify  the  deeds  of  the 
body,  ye  shall  live.  ISTay,  in  all  these  things  we  are  more 
than  conquerors  through  Him  that  loved  us."  (Kom.  viii,  5, 
13,  37.)  By  many  other  passages  of  Scripture,  this  may  also 
be  proved. 

GALATIANS  V,  16-18. 

8.  But  let  us  now  consider  Gal.  v,  16-18,  and  let  us  compare 
it  with  Bom.  vii,  22,  23,  the  passage  at  present  under  investi- 
gation, that  it  may  also  clearly  appear,  from  such  considera- 
tion and  comparison,  that  the  result  of  the  contest  between  the 
Spirit  and  the  flesh  is  generally  this  :  the  Spirit  departs  from 
the  combat  the  conqueror  of  the  flesh,  especially  as,  in  this 
seventh  chapter  to  the  Bomans,  we  perceive  an  entirely  con- 
trary issue  or  result  is  described  and  deplored.  The  passage 
may  be  thus  rendered :  "  This  I  say  then.  Walk  in  the  Spirit 
and  fulfill  not  that  after  which  the  flesh  lusteth,"  or  "  ye  shall 
not  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the  flesh."  "  For  the  flesh  lusteth  against 
the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against  the  flesh  ;  and  these  are  con- 
trary the  one  to  the  other  ;  that  ye  may  not  do  the  things  that 
ye  would.  But  if  ye  be  led  of  the  Spirit,  ye  are  not  under 
the  law." 

The  exhortation  of  the  apostle  occurs  in  the  sixteenth  verse; 
and,  on  account  of  the  ambiguity  of  the  Greek  word,  it  may 
be  read  in  two  diflerent  ways,  "  fulfill  not,"  or  "ye  shall  not 
fulfill."  If  the  former  rendering  be  adopted,  then  the  exhor- 
tation consists  of  two  parts,  of  which  the  one  teaches  what 
must  be  done,  and  the  other  what  must  be  omitted  ;  that  is, 
"  "We  must  walk  in  the  Spirit,  and  the  desires  of  the  flesh 
must  not  be  fulfilled."  But  if  the  clause  be  rendered  in  the 
second  manner,  then  the  sixteenth  verse  contains  an  exhorta- 


DISSERTATION. 


315 


tion  in  these  words  :  "  Walk  in  the  Spirit ;"  and  a  consectary 
subjoined  to  the  exhortation  in  these  words  :  "  And  ye  shall 
not  fulfill  the  desires  or  lusts  of  the  flesh."  The  latter  mode 
of  reading  the  passage  seems  to  be  more  agreeable  to  the  mind 
of  the  apostle  ;  for  he  had  previously,  in  the  thirteenth  verse, 
exhorted  the  Galatians  not  to  abuse  their  Christian  liberty 
for  carnal  licentiousness  and  lasciviousness.  But  now,  in  the 
sixteenth  verse,  he  produces  a  remedy,  by  which  they  will  be 
able  to  restrain  and  curb  [impetum]  the  assaults  and  the  power 
of  the  flesh,  and  which  is,  if  they  walk  in  the  Spirit,  it  shall 
then  come  to  pass,  that  they  shall  not  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the 
flesh. 

In  the  seventeenth  verse  a  reason  is  added,  that  is  deduced 
from  the  contrariety  or  contest  which  subsists  between  the 
flesh  and  the  Spirit,  and  from  either  the  end  or  the  result  of 
this  contest. 

(1.)  The  contrariety  or  contest  is  described  in  these  words  : 
"  For  the  flesh  lusteth  against  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against 
the  flesh."  From  which  is  manifest  the  necessity  both  of  the 
exhortation,  not  to  abuse  their  Christian  liberty  to  carnal 
licentiousness,  and  not  to  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  ;  and  of 
the  remedy,  by  which  alone  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  can  be  curbed 
and  restrained,  and  which  is  this  :  "  if  they  walk  in  the  Spirit, 
that  lusteth  against  the  flesh."  For  it  is  from  this  enmity  and 
contrariety  which  subsists  between  the  flesh  and  the  Spirit 
that  the  conclusion  is  draw^n,  "  If  ye  v^alk  in  the  Spirit,  ye 
shall  not  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the  flesh."  From  this  it  is  also 
manifest,  that  this  latter  mode  of  rendering  is  better  adapted 
to  the  meaning  of  the  apostle. 

(2.)  The  end  or  result  of  this  contest  is  described  in  these 
words  :  "  And  these  are  contrary  the  one  to  the  other,  that  ye 
may  not  do  the  things  that  ye  would."  I  have  said  that  the 
end  or  the  issue  of  the  contest  is  here  described  ;  because  some 
persons  suppose  that  its  issue,  and  not  its  end,  is  pointed  out 
in  this  passage,  (i.)  But  the  particle,  «va,  "  that,"  which  is 
used  by  the  apostle,  signifies  the  end  or  intention,  and  not  the 
result  or  issue  ;  and  this  interpretation  is  entirely  agreeable  to 
the  mind  of  the  apostle.    "  For  the  Spirit  lusteth  against  the 


316 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


flesh"  for  this  purj^ose,  "  that  we  may  not  do  those  things" 
which  we  lust  according  to  the  flesh,  and  "  which  we  would," 
the  consequence  of  which  is,  "  if  we  walk  in  the  Spirit,  we 
shall  not  fulfill  the  desires  of  the  flesh."  And,  on  the  con- 
trary, since  "  the  flesh  also  lusteth  against  the  Spirit"  for  this 
purpose,  "  that  we  may  not  do  those  things  which  we  lust  ac- 
cording to  the  Spirit,"  it  follows  that  if  we  walk  in  the  flesh  or 
according  to  the  flesh,  we  shall  not  fulfill  the  desires  of  the 
Spirit.  But  this  rendering  is  agreeable  to  the  scope  or  design 
of  the  apostle,  "  that  ye  may  not  do  what  things  soever  ye 
would  according  to  the  flesh." 

(ii.)  If  we  assert  that  the  result  or  issue  is  here  signified, 
then  the  meaning  will  likewise  be  two-fold.  For  it  will  be 
possible  for  it  to  be  as  follows  :  "  The  flesh  and  the  Spirit  are 
contrary  the  one  to  the  other,  so  that  ye  cannot  do  those  things 
which  according  to  the  Spirit  ye  would."  It  may  likewise  be 
this  :  "  So  that  ye  cannot  do  these  things  which,  according  to 
the  flesh  ye  would."  That  is,  this  contest  obtains  the  following 
result,  "  that  ye  cannot  do  those  things  which,  according  to 
the  Spirit^  ye  would  ;"  or,  "  that  ye  cannot  do  those  things, 
which,  according  to  the  fleshy  ye  would."  But  let  us  see  which 
of  these  two  meanings  is  the  more  suitable  :  Truly,  the  latter  of 
them  is.  It  is  not  only  more  suitable,  but  likewise  necessary, 
if  the  apostle  is  here  treating  about  the  issue  or  result.  This 
will  be  still  more  apparent  from  the  absurdity  of  the  admoni- 
tion, if  the  passage  be  explained  in  the  other  sense  :  The 
apostle  admonishes  the  Galatians,  "  to  walk  in  the  Spirit,  and 
not  to  fulfill  the  desires  of  the  flesh ;"  (for  we  will  now  retain 
this  rendering  of  the  latter  clause,  as  that  which  is  more  con- 
sentaneous with  the  meaning  that  explains  the  passage  con- 
cerning this  issue  or  result ;)  and  the  persuasion  to  this  will 
then  be  :  "  For  the  flesh  and  the  Spirit  are  contrary  the  one 
to  the  other,  by  this  result,  that  ye  cannot  do  those  things 
which,  according  to  the  Spirit,  ye  would."  This  indeed  is  not 
to  exhort,  but  to  dissuade  and  dehort  by  a  forewarning  of  the 
unhappy  result. 

Besides,  reason  itself  requires,  according  to  [logical]  scien- 
tific usage,  that  what  has  been  proposed  be  drawn  out  in  the 


DISSERTATION. 


317 


conclusion  ;  otherwise  the  parts  of  connection  will  be  broken. 
But  the  proposition  was  either  this — "  Walk  in  the  Spirit,  and 
ye  shall  not  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the  flesh, or  it  was  this : 
"  Walk  in  the  Spirit,  and  fulfill  not  the  lusts  of  tlie  flesh."  I 
am  desirous  to  have  it  demonstrated  to  me,  by  what  meanjB 
this  proposition  can  be  concluded  from  the  eighteenth  verse 
understood  about  the  issue  or  result,  by  which  the  flesh  hin- 
ders the  Galatians  from  doing  that  which,  according  to  the 
Spirit^  they  would.  But  it  has  been  already  shewn,  that  each 
of  these  propositions  may  be  fairly  concluded  from  the  pas- 
sage, when  undersrood  as  relating  to  the  end  or  intention  of 
the  conflict,  nay,  when  also  understood  as  referring  to  the 
issue  or.  result  when  the  Spirit  is  the  conqueror.  It  is  appar- 
ent, therefore,  not  only  that  this  is  the  end  or  design  of  the 
contest  which  is  here  mentioned  from  the  lusting  of  the  Spirit, 
but  that  this  is  likewise  its  issue  or  result  from  the  strength 
and  power  of  the  Spirit — that,  when  the  flesh  is  subdued,  the 
Spirit  comes  off*  as  the  conqueror  ;  and  that  the  man  who,  by 
the  Spirit,  wages  war  against  the  flesh,  and  who  walks  in  the 
Spirit,  does  not  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the  flesh. 

From  these  is  inferred  a  consectary  in  the  eighteenth  verse : 
"  But  if  ye  be  led  of  the  Spirit,  ye  are  not  under  the  law  ;" 
that  is,  if  ye  walk  in  the  Spirit,  if  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Spirit  ye  contend  against  the  lusts  of  the  flesh,  and  contend  so 
as  not  to  fulfill  them,  from  these  circumstances  you  may  as- 
suredly conclude  that  ye  are  not  under  the  law. 

In  this  consectary,  we  see,  that  the  phrases,  "  to  be  under 
the  law,"  and  "  not  to  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the  flesh,"  are  opposed 
to  each  other  ;  for  the  latter  of  them  is  descriptive  of  the  proper 
effect  of  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit.  Wherefore,  the  phrases, 
"  to  be  under  the  law,"  and  "  to  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the  flesh," 
are  consentaneous  and  of  the  same  import.  But  this  is  the 
very  thing  which  is  asserted  in  Romans  vi,  14  :  "  For  sin  shall 
not  have  dominion  over  you  ;  for  ye  are  not  under  the  law, 
but  under  grace."  From  this,  it  is  apparent,  that  the  domin- 
ion of  sin,  which  is  the  cause  why  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  are 
fulfilled,  prevails  in  those  persons  who  are  mider  the  law. 
But  since  the  dominion  of  sin  does  not  obtain  in  those  who 


318  JAMES  AKMINIUS. 

are  under  grace,  (and,  in  faact,  on  this  account,  because  they 
are  under  grace,)  it  is  therefore  evident  that  these  phrases, "  to  be 
under  grace,"  and  "  to  be  led  by  the  Spirit,"  are  consentaneous, 
nay,  that  they  are  exactly  the  same.  For  the  eifect  of  each  of 
them  is  one  and  alike,  and  that  is,  to  prevent  sin  from  having  do- 
minion over  a  man,  and  to  hinder  man  from  fulfilling  the  lusts  of 
the  flesh,  which  is  also  explained  at  great  length  in  Romans  viii, 
in  a  manner  agreeable  to  that  which  is  briefly  laid  down  in  this 
seventeenth  verse,  that  is,  "  The  Spirit  is  contrary  to  the  flesh 
for  this  purpose — that  men  may  not  do  those  things  which, 
according  to  the  flesh,  they  would."  But,  from  Romans  vii, 
it  is  very  plain,  that  the  result  of  that  contest  is  diflerent  from 
the  one  upon  which  the  apostle  is  here  treating :  For,  in  that 
chapter,  the  man  does  that  which,  after  the  flesh,  he  would, 
and  does  not  what  he  is  said  to  will  after  the  inward  man ; 
the  law  of  God,  the  law  of  the  mind,  and  the  inward  man, 
vainly  attempting  to  restrain  the  power  of  sin  and  to  hinder 
the  lusts  of  the  flesh,  because  all  these  [strive  as  they  may] 
are  debilitated  through  the  flesh. 

9.  If  any  one  urge  this  as  an  objection,  "  It  likewise  befalls 
the  best  of  the  regenerate,  that  they  do  not  the  things 
which,  according  to  the  Spirit,  they  would,  but  that  they  ful- 
fill the  lusts  of  the  flesh  ;"  I  perfectly  assent  to  the  truth  of 
this,  if  the  small  addition  be  made,  that  "  this  sometimes  hap- 
pens to  the  regenerate."  For  if  such  be  their  general 
practice,  they  do  not  now  walk  in  the  Spirit;  though  this  is  a 
property  of  the  regenerate.  I  say,  that  Romans  vii  does  not 
describe  what  sometimes  befalls  the  pious,  and  that  it  contains 
a  description  of  the  state  of  that  man  about  whom  the  apostle 
is  there  treating,  that  is,  of  a  man  who  is  undei  the  law,  before 
he  is  led  by  the  guidance  of  grace,  and  is  governed  by  the 
motions  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  pas- 
sage in  Gal.  v,  16-18. 

Then  I  reply.  Such  a  case  as  this  does  not  occur  from  the 
circumstance  of  the  Spirit,  who  has  for  a  long  time  maintained 
a  strenuous  contest  with  the  desires  of  the  flesh,  being  at 
length  conquered,  and  yielding  on  account  of  impotence  or 
weakness  :  But  it  happens,  because  the  man  is  either  overta- 


DISSERTATION. 


319 


ken  with  temptation  and  overcome,  before  he  begins  to  oppose 
to  it  the  arms  of  the  Spirit  and  of  grace ;  or,  in  the  progress 
of  the  conflict,  he  throws  out  of  his  hands  those  arms  which, 
at  the  commencement,  he  began  to  use  ;  or  he  uses  them  no 
longer,  having  begun  the  battle  in  the  Spirit,  but  ending  in 
the  flesh.  In  no  other  way  than  in  this  can  it  happen,  that 
the  flesh,  the  world  and  Satan  can  overcome  us ;  because 
"  greater  is  He  who  is  in  us,  than  be  that  is  in  the  world,"  as 
has  already  been  pointed  out  in  several  passages.  Without 
manifest  ignominy  and  contumely  poured  on  divine  grace  and 
on  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  no  other  cause  can  be  assigned  why 
the  pious,  and  those  who  are  placed  under  grace,  should  some- 
times be  conquered  by  the  flesh,  the  world  and  Satan ;  for 
either  the  Spirit  that  is  in  us  is  not  the  stronger  of  the  two ; 
or,  while  lusting  and  fighting  against  the  flesh.  He  overcomes. 
And  how  can  it  possibly  come  to  pass,  that  He  who  has  con- 
quered the  flesh  while  it  was  still  in  its  full  strength,  and  has 
thus  subjected  us  to  Himself,  should  not  be  able  to  gain  the 
victory  over  the  flesh  when  it  is  crucifled  and  [mortificata] 
dead  in  the  body  of  Christ  ? 

10.  To  the  THIRD  REASON  it  is  objected,  "  Even  the  regene- 
rate may  in  some  degree  and  relatively  be  said  to  be  captives 
under  sin,  that  is,  so  far  as  they  are  not  yet  fully  regenerated, 
and  still  feel  within  themselves  the  motions  of  the  flesh  lust- 
ing against  the  Spirit,  from  which  they  are  not  completely 
delivered  while  they  continue  in  this  mortal  body."  I  grant 
the  antecedent,  but  I  deny  the  consequence ;  for  so  far  are  the 
Scriptures  from  ascribing  the  detention  of  the  regenerate  as 
captives  under  sin,  to  the  imperfection  of  regeneration  and  to 
the  remains  of  the  flesh,  that  they  are  said  with  respect  to  this 
very  regeneration  to  be  freed  from  the  yoke  and  slavery  of 
sin  and  from  the  tyranny  of  the  devil.  "The  remains  of  sin 
[supersunt]  survive  in  the  regenerate,"  and,  "The  regenerate 
are  detained  as  captives  by  the  remains  of  sin,"  are  contra- 
dictory affirmations :  For  the  former  of  the  two  is  a  token  of 
sin  conquered  and  overcome ;  the  latter  attributes  victory  and 
triumph  to  sin.  After  the  Holy  Spirit  has  commenced  the 
mortification  and  death  of  sin,  what  is  the  act  of  the  same 


320 


JAMES  AEMINTCS. 


Spirit  respecting  sin  ?  Undoubtedly  it  is  the  persecution  of 
the  remains  of  sin,  that  He  maj  subdue  and  extinguish  them 
until  they  no  longer  exist ;  "  and  when  their  place  is  sought 
after,  it  is  no  more  to  be  found,"  as  St.  Augustine  has  ele- 
gantly observed,  when  treating  on  this  matter  in  a  passage  of 
his  works. 

But  the  cause  why  such  an  opinion  as  this  is  entertained,  is 
because  "  deliverance  from  sin"  and  "  slavery  under  its  tyran- 
nical power,"  "  a  being  loosed  from  the  chains  of  Satan"  and 
"  captivity  under  his  tyranny,"  are  so  accounted  as  if  they  can 
concur  together,  as  the  phrase  is,  in  remiss  degrees^  and  meet 
together  in  one  subject,  in  much  the  same  manner  as  the  col- 
or of  white  and  that  of  blade  meet  together  in  green^  and  heat 
and  cold  meet  together  in  lukewarmness.  Yet  this  matter 
stands  in  a  situation  vastly  different ;  for  liberty  cannot  con- 
sist with  even  the  smallest  portion  of  servitude  or  captivity ; 
though  it  may  labor  under  great  difficulties  in  resisting  its  as- 
saulting foes,  and  though  it  may  occasionally  come  out  of  the 
(5onflict  with  [aliquam']  something  like  a  defeat.  But  if  the 
matter  stood  in  the  relation  of  similies  which  have  been  ad- 
duced, yet  even  then  it  could  not  be  said,  "  This  man  is  part- 
ly free  from  sin,  and  partly  its  slave  and  captive ;"  but  a 
necessity  would  then  arise  for  the  existence  of  a  third  thing 
from  these  two,  which  might  obtain  the  name  of  "  a  medium 
between  the  extremes,"  belonging  neither  to  this  nor  to  that. 
But  I  am  desirous  to  see  some  passage  of  Scripture  adduced, 
where  that  is  said  about  the  regenerate,  and  about  those  who 
are  placed  under  grace,  which  is  ascribed  to  the  man  about 
whom  the  apostle  is  treating,  or  what  is  equivalent  to  it. 

ISAIAH  LXIV,  6. 

11.  But  a  passage  is  produced  from  the  prophet  Isaiah  to 
prove  that  pious  persons,  and  those  who  are  placed  under 
grace  are,  by  the  law  of  their  members,  brought  into  captivity 
under  the  law  of  sin.  The  degree  of  correctness  with  such  an 
affirmation  is  made,  will  be  very  manifest  from  a  comparison 
of  the  two  passages.    That  in  Isaiah  (Ixiv,  6)  says,  "  But  we 


DISSERTATION. 


321 


are  all  as  an  unclean  thing,  and  all  our  righteousness  are  as 
filthy  rags ;  and  we  all  do  fade  as  a  leaf ;  and  our  iniquities, 
like  the  wind,  have  taken  us  away."  The  passage  in  Romans, 
(vii,  23,)  now  under  investigation,  is  this.  "But  I  see  an- 
other law  in  my  members,  warring  against  the  law  of  my 
mind,  and  bringing  me  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin  which 
is  in  my  members." 

Let  us  now  approach  and  institute  a  comparison.  The  sub- 
ject of  the  first  of  these  passages  is,  the  captivity  by  which  the 
children  of  Israel  were  led  away  into  exile  on  account  of  their 
sins  ;  the  subject  of  the  latter  is,  captivity  under  sin  ;  there- 
fore, this  is  to  pass  over  to  a  different  geiiiis^  contrary  to  the 
method  observed  in  every  approved  discussion. 

In  the  former  of  these  passages,  the  subject  is  the  punish- 
ments which  that  people  deservedly  suffered  on  account  of  the 
actual  sins  which  they  had  committed  against  God ;  but,  in 
the  latter,  the  subject  is  the  cause  whence  it  arises  that  the 
man  who  consents  to  the  law  of  God,  and  who,  with  the  law 
of  his  mind,  wages  war  against  the  law  of  his  members,  is  con- 
quered and  overcome,  so  that  he  actually  commits  sin,  to 
which  he  is  instigated  and  impelled  by  sin  which  dwelleth  in 
him.  Wherefore,  the  latter  passage  treats  upon  tJie  cause  of 
actual  si?i,  and  the  former  upon  the  punishments  of  actual  sins. 
For  this  phrase,  "  We  all  do  fade  as  a  leaf,  and  our  iniquities, 
like  the  wind,  have  taken  us  away,"  does  not  signify  that  those 
men  were  impelled  to  some  kind  of  sin  through  the  depraved 
lusts  of  the  flesh,  as  by  a  vehement  wind,  or  that  they  melted 
away,  as  it  were,  into  sins  ;  but  it  signifies,  that,  on  account  of 
actual  sins,  which  are  distinguished  by  the  appellation  of  "our 
iniquities,"  they  are  driven  away  into  banishment  as  by  a 
wind,  and  were  scattered  about  as  leaves.  Let  this  passage 
be  compared  with  the  first  Psalm,  in  which  similar  declara- 
tions are  made  concerning  the  wicked.  Consult  our  interpret- 
ers of  holy  writ,  such  as  Calvin,  Musculus,  Gualther,  &c., 
and  it  will  be  evident,  even  with  respect  to  the  things  which 
precede  it,  that  the  whole  of  this  passage  is  unaptly  cited  by 
many  persons  to  prove  what  they  are  desirous  to  establish. 

For  the  plainer  and  more  obvious  explanation  of  this  mat- 


322 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


ter  we  must  observe,  that  there  is  a  two-fold  captivity  under 
the  tyranny  of  sin — the  one^  that  of  our  primeval  origin  from 
Adam,  according  to  which  we  are  all  born  "  children  of  wrath" 
and  the  servants  of  sin — the  other^  that  of  our  own  particular 
act,  when,  by  actual  transgressions,  we  subject  and  bind  our- 
selves still  more  to  sin,  and  engage  in  its  service.  Some  per- 
sons will  have  this  two-fold  servitude  to  have  been  allegori- 
cally  typified  by  the  Egyptian  and  Babylonian  captivities. 
For  the  Israelites,  in  their  parents,  entered  into  Egypt ;  and 
while  there,  after  a  lapse  of  years,  they  began  to  be  oppressed 
and  to  be  regarded  as  servants.  The  same  people,  on  account 
of  their  sins,  were  led  away,  by  the  violence  of  their  enemies, 
into  captivity  in  Babylon. 

But  the  captivity  about  which  the  apostle  is  here  treating, 
is  posterior  to  the  first  of  these  two  kinds ;  for  the  law  of  the 
members^  which  v*^e  have  from  our  primeval  origin,  waging 
war  with  the  law  of  the  mind^  when  the  latter  is  overcome, 
brings  a  man  who  is  under  the  law  into  captivity  to  the  law  of 
sin,  that  very  man  who  was  formerly  conceived  in  sin  and  bora 
in  iniquity.  And,  to  express  the  whole  in  one  word,  he  who  was 
born  in  sin  and  originally  under  captivity  to  it,  is  brought  into 
captivity  under  the  law  of  sin  by  means  of  actual  sins. 

From  these  observations,  therefore,  it  is  apparent,  that  the 
proposition  of  our  syllogism  is  true,  and  stands  unshaken 
against  all  these  objections.  The  assumption  stands  in  the 
very  text  of  the  apostle,  from  which  the  conclusion  follows, 
that  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle  treats  in  this  passage, 
is  an  unregenerate  man,  and  not  pilaced  under  grace,  but  un- 
der the  law. 


DISSERTATIOIT. 


323 


VEESE  THE  TWENTY-EOUETH. 

1.  The  lamentable  exdamation^  0  wretched  man  that  I  am  ! 
— a  two-fold  reading  of  it.  2.  The  lody  of  death  is  the 
hody  of  sin.  3.  By  four  reasons  it  is  proved  that  the  hody 
of  death  is  not  our  mortal  body.  4.  This  is  confirmed  by 
the  testimonies  of  St.  Augustine  and  jEpij)hanius.  5.  An 
argument  iti  favor  of  the  true  opinion.  6.  Another  argu- 
ment in  its  favor. 

1.  From  the  condition  of  this  man,  when  accurately  con- 
sidered bj  himself,  follows  the  mournful  lament  and  exclama- 
tion, "  O  wretched  man  that  I  am !  who  shall  deliver  me 
from  the  body  of  this  death,  or  from  this  body  of  death?"  Of 
this,  a  two-fold  explanation  is  produced,  according  the  double 
meaning  of  the  words — either  "  from  the  body  of  this  death," 
or  "  from  this  body  of  death,"  which  some  people  interpret  by 
"  this  mortal  body  that  we  bear  about  with  us,"  and  others, 
by  "  that  body  of  sin  which  has  the  dominion  in  a  man  who  is 
under  the  law,  and  which  renders  him  liable  to  death."  The 
latter  interpretation,  however,  is  more  argreeable  both  to  the 
phrase  and  to  the  context  ;  for  the  pronoun,  tkth,  must  not  be 
referred  to  Hwjaaro^,  ^'the  body,"  but  to  ©avarj?,  "death,"  to 
which  it  is  most  nearly  conjoined  ;  and  the  clause  ought  to  be 
rendered  thus  :  "Who  shall  deliver  me  from  the  body  of  this 
death,"  [which  is  sin  not  only  existing  within  me,  but  dwell- 
ing and  reigning]  ?  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  ITth  and  20th 
verses. 

2.  For  the  apostle  attributes  a  body  to  sin  in  the  sixth  verse 
of  the  sixth  chapter  of  this  epistle  :  "  Our  old  man  is  crucified 
with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed,"  the  de- 
struction of  which  is  followed  by  a  deliverance  from  the  servi- 
tude of  sin,  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  same  verse.  The  pharse 
also  occurs  in  Col.  ii,  11 :  "In  putting  off  the  body  of  the 
SINS  of  the  flesh  by  the  circumcision  of  Christ."  Wherefore, 
according  to  this  mode  of  reading  it,  the  meaning  of  the  ex- 
clamation is,  "  Who  shall  deliver  me  from  this  tyranny  of  sin, 


324 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


which,  reigning  in  me  and  dwelling  in  my  flesh,  bringing  me 
into  captivity  and  subjecting  me  to  itself,  brings  certain  death 
to  me  ?" 

3.  Some  other  persons  are  urgent  about  a  different  render- 
ing, and  give  this  meaning  to  the  words,  "  Who  shall  deliver 
me  from  this  mortal  body  ?"  That  is,  as  the  apostle  speaks 
in  another  passage,  "  I  desire  to  be  dissolved,  and  to  be 
with  Christ."  But  this  meaning  does  not  agree  with  the 
exclamation, 

(1.)  On  account  of  the  construction,  which  declares  that  the 
pronoun,  tktk,  "  this,"  must  not  be  referred  to  the  body,  but 
to  death. 

(2.)  Because  the  preceding  verses  do  not  permit  this  mean- 
ing to  be  entertained.  For  the  force  and  tyranny  of  sin, 
dwelling  in  this  man,  and  impelling  him  to  fulfill  his  desires, 
is  the  subject  on  which  the  apostle  is  here  treating.  But  "the 
deliverance"  which  is  earnestly  sought  in  this  24:th  verse,  is 
opposed  to  "  the  captivity"  which  is  the  subject  of  the  23d 
verse. 

(3.)  On  account  of  the  thanksgiving  which  is  appended  to 
it,  and  which  ought  not  to  be  subjoined  to  a  desire  which  was 
not  then  fulfilled  [if  the  meaning  of  the  phrase  were,  this 
mortal  hody']. 

(4.)  Because  the  grace  of  Christ  is  not  simply  to  deliver  us 
out  of  this  mortal  body,  but  to  free  us  from  tlie  body  of  sin 
and  from  its  dominion.  It  is  true  indeed,  that,  through  the 
blessed  ava^u5«v,  ''dissolution"  or  "departure,"  for  which  we 
are  waiting  in  the  faith  and  hope  of  Christ,  rest  is  granted  to 
us  from  all  our  labors,  and  from  the  conflict  of  lusts  with 
which  we  are  inwardly  attacked.  But  in  this  passage  the 
apostle  is  treating,  not  about  the  conflict  and  impulse  of  lusts 
which  exist  within  us,  but  about  the  fulfilling  of  those  lusts  by 
that  impulse  to  which  "  the  law  of  the  mind"  opposes  itself 
in  vain. 

4.  St.  Augustine  is  one  of  my  supporters,  who  says,  in  his 
treatise  On  Nature  and  Grace^  (cap.  53,)  "  The  saints  most 
certainly  do  not  pray  to  be  delivered  from  the  substance  of  the 
body,  which  is  good,  but  from  carnal  vices  ;  from  which  no 


DISSERTATION. 


325 


man  is  delivered  without  fhe  grace  of  the  Savior,  nor  at  the 
time  of  his  departure  from  the  bodj,  when  it  dies."  It  is  no 
injury  to  my  interpretation,  that  St.  Augustine  here  says,  that, 
according  to  his  interpretation,  Saints  or  holy  persons  pray 
for  deliverance  from  carnal  vices,"  &c. ;  I  only  point  out  what 
he  understood  by  "  the  body  of  death." 

On  the  verification  of  Justice^  against  Ccelestius^  St.  Au- 
gustine also  says,  "  It  is  one  thing,  therefore,  to  depart  out  of 
this  body,  which  the  last  day  of  the  present  life  compels  all 
men  to  do ;  but  it  is  another  thing  to  he  delivered  from  the 
hody  of  this  death^  which  divine  grace  alone,  through  Jesus 
Christ,  imparts  to  his  saints  and  believers." 

Epiphanius,  On  the  QUh  Heresy^  {lib.  2,  torn.  1,)  from  Meth- 
odius, says,  "  Wherefore,  O  Aglaophon,  he  does  not  call  this 
body  death^  but  sin  which  dwells  in  the  body  through  the 
lust  of  the  flesh,  and  from  which  God  has  delivered  him  by 
his  coming." 

5.  (1.)  Wherefore,  from  the  24th  verse,  when  rightly  un- 
derstood, I  argue  thus  for  the  establishment  of  my  own 
opinion: 

Those  men  who  are  placed  under  grace  are  not  wretched ; 
But  this  man  is  wretched  ; 
Therefore,  this  man  is  not  placed  under  grace. 
The  assumption  is  in  the  text,  and  thus  placed  beyond  ali 
controversy. 

In  reference  to  the  proposition,  perhaps  some  one  will  say, 
"  Men,  placed  under  grace,  are  partly  blessed,  and  partly 
wretched — blessed,  as  they  are  regenerate  and  partakers  of  the 
grace  of  Christ — wretched,  as  they  still  have  within  them  the 
remains  of  sin,  with  which  they  ought  to  maintain  a  constant 
warfare.  This  is  a  sure  sign  of  a  felicity  which  is  not  yet  full 
and  perfect."  I  confess  that,  while  the  regenerate  continue  as 
sojourners  in  this  mortal  life,  they  do  not  attain  to  a  felicity 
that  is  full,  complete  in  all  its  parts,  and  perfect.  But  I  do 
not  recollect  ever  to  have  read  [in  the  Scriptures]  that  they 
are,  on  this  account,  called  "  wretched"  with  regard  to  the 
"  spiritual  life  which  they  live  by  faith  of  the  Son  of  God," 
though,  in  reference  to  this  natural  life,  "  they  be  of  all  men 


326 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


most  miserable."  (1  Cor.  xv,  19.)  The  opposite  to  this  may 
be  easily  proved  from  the  Scriptures  ;  "  Blessed  are  the  poor 
in  spirit — they  that  mourn — that  hunger  and  thirst  after 
righteousness,"  &c.  (Matt,  v,  3-12.) 

"  But,"  some  one  will  rejoin,  "  Is  it  not  wretched  to  contend 
with  the  remains  of  sin,  to  be  buffeted  by  the  messenger  of 
Satan,  sometimes  to  be  overcome,  and  to  be  grievously  injur- 
ed ?"  It  is  undoubtedly  desirable  that  this  were  not  necessa- 
ry, that  it  never  occurred,  that  they  might  be  delivered  from 
the  messenger  of  Satan ;  but  the  contenders,  and  those  who 
are  thus  buffeted,  canr>ot  be  called  "  wretched"  on  account  of 
that  contest  and  'buffeting.  But  it  is  wretched  indeed,  to  be 
overcome ;  yet  neither  are  they  called  "  wretched,"  who, 
though  they  be  sometimes  conquered,  more  frequently  obtain 
the  victory  over  the  world,  sin  and  Satan. 

6.  (2.)  He  who  desires  to  be  delivered  from  the  body  of 
this  death,  that  is,  from  the  dominion  and  tyranny  of  sin,  is 
not  placed  under  grace,  but  under  the  law.  But  this  man  de- 
sires to  be  delivered  from  the  dominion  and  tyranny  of  sin  ; 
therefore,  this  man  is  not  placed  under  grace,  but  under  the 
law. 

The  proposition  is  true,  because  regenerate  men,  and  those 
who  are  placed  under  grace,  are  free  from  the  servitude  and 
tyranny  of  sin — not  indeed  perfectly  free,  but  yet  so  far  as  to 
render  it  impossible  for  them  to  be  said  to  be  under  the  domin- 
ion and  servitude  of  sin,  if  the  person  who  speaks  concerning 
them  be  desirous  of  talking  in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures. 
But  it  has  been  already  proved,  that  this  man  is  desirous  of 
being  freed  from  the  body  of  sin  which  dwells  and  reigns 
within  him  ;  therefore,  the  conclusion  regularly  follows. 


DISSERTATION-. 


327 


YEESE  THE  TWENTY-FIFTH. 

1.  Various  readings  of  the  first  clause,  from  the  ancient  fa- 
thers. 2.  In  the  latter  clause,  this  man  is  said  "  to  serve 
the  law  of  God  with  his  mind,  hut  with  his  flesh,  the  law  of 
sinP  3.  serve  God^^  and  "  to  serve  the  law  of  God^'^ 
are  not  the  same  thing.  4.  The  various  hinds  of  law  men- 
tioned in  this  chapter,  with  a  diagram,  and  the  explanation 
of  it.  5.  From  this  verse  nothing  can  he  obtained  in  con- 
firmation of  the  contrary  opinion. 

1.  St.  Chrysostom  reads  the  former  part  of  this  verse  thus  : 
"  I  thank,"  &c.,  which  is  also  the  reading  of  Theophjlact. 

This  is  the  reading  of  St.  Ambrose  :  "  The  grace  of  God 
through  Jesus  Christ."  St.  Jerome,  also,  against  Pelagius, 
adopts  the  same  reading. 

St.  Augustine  renders  the  clause  thus  :  "  By  the  grace  of 
God  through  Jesus  Christ."  {Discourse  5.  On  the  Words  of 
the  Apostle.    Tom.  1 0.) 

Epiphanius  renders  it,  "  The  grace  of  God  through  Jesus 
Christ."    {From  Methodius  against  Origen,  Heresy  64.  Lih. 

2,  tom.  1.) 

But  this  clause  contains  a  thanksgiving,  in  which  St.  Paul 
returns  thanks  to  God  that  he,  in  his  own  person,  has  been  de- 
livered from  this  body  of  sin,  about  which  he  had  been  treat- 
ing, and  to  which  that  man  was  liable  whose  character  he  was 
then  pei-sonating.    In  this,  thanksgiving  is  contained,  by  im- 
plication, an  answer  to  the  preceding  interrogatory  exclama- 
tion ;  that  is,  "  The  grace  of  God  will  deliver  this  man  from 
the  body  of  this  death,  from  which  he  could  not  be  delivered 
by  the  law."    This  is  directly  and  openly  explained  by  some 
copies  of  the  Greek  original,  in  which  this  verse  is  thus  read  : 
"  The  grace  of  God,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  that  is, 
"  This  grace  will  deliver  me,  or  the  man  whose  character  I 
have  been  personating,  from  the  body  of  this  death" — a  thing 
which  it  was  the  chief  purpose  of  the  apostle  to  prove  in  this 
investigation. 


328 


JAMES  AEMICnCS. 


2.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  same  verse,  is  something  resem- 
bling a  brief  recapitulation  of  all  that  had  been  previously 
spoken,  in  which  the  state  of  the  man  about  whom  the  apostle 
is  here  treating,  is  briefly  defined  and  described  in  the  follow- 
ing words :  "  So  then,  with  the  mind,  I  myself  serve  the  law 
of  God  ;  but  with  the  flesh,  the  law  of  sin."  In  the  correct 
explanation  of  these  phrases,  lies  an  important  key  for  the 
clear  exposition  and  dilucidation  of  the  whole  matter ;  these 
phrases  must,  therefore,  be  subjected  to  a  diligent  exami- 
nation. 

3.  Those  persons  who  interpret  this  passage  as  relating  to  a 
regenerate  man  and  to  one  placed  under  grace,  are  desirous  to 
imitate,  by  these  phrases,  that  St.  Paul,  so  far  as  he  was  re- 
generate, "  served  God,"  but  that  so  far  as  he  was  unregeue- 
rate,  and  still  partly  carnal,  "  he  served  sin."  They  also  take 
"  the  mind''  in  the  acceptation  of  the  regenerated  portion  of 
man,  and  the  flesh"  for  that  portion  of  him  which  is  not  yet 
regenerate  ;  and  they  suppose  that  "  to  serve  the  law  of  God" 
is  the  same  thing  as  "  to  serve  God,"  and  that  to  serve  the 
law  of  sin"  is  the  same  thing  as  "to  serve  sin."  But  neither 
of  these  suppositions  can  be  proved  by  this  text  or  by  other 
passages  of  Scripture. 

(1.)  For  the  apostle  is  not  accustomed  to  bestow  on  man, 
as  he  IS  regenerate^  the  epithet  of  ^^the  mind.;''  but  that  of 
"  the  Spirit.^''  And  this  he  does  for  a  very  just  reason  ;  for 
'•the  mind"  is  the  subject  of  regeneration,  ''the  Holy  Spirit" 
is  the  effector  of  it,  from  communion  with  whom  a  participar 
tion  also  with  his  name  arises.  Besides,  "  the  mind"  is  attrib- 
uted to  the  flesh  :  "  Yainly  pufted  up  by  his  fleshly  mind." 
(Col.  ii,  18.)  The  gentiles  are  said  to  have  "  walked  in  the 
vanity  of  their  mind."  (Eph.  ii,  IT.)  Idolaters  are  "given 
over  to  a  reprobate  mind ;"  (Rom.  i,  28 ;)  and  the  apostle 
mentions  "men  of  corrupt  minds."  (1  Tim.  vi,  5;  2  Tim. 
iii,  8.) 

(2.)  But  that  "to  serve  God"  is  not  the  same  as  "to  serve 
the  law  of  God,"  and  "  to  serve  sin"  is  not  the  same  as  "  to 
serve  the  law  of  sin,"  is  evident, 

FiKST.  From  the  difference  of  the  words  themselves.    For  it 


t 


DISSERTATIOIT. 


329 


is  very  probable,  that  different  phrases  denote  different  mean- 
ings. If  any  one  denies  this,  the  proof  of  bis  position  is  in- 
cumbent on  himself. 

Secondly.  From  the  words  of  Christy  who  denied  the  pos- 
sibility of  any  man  serving  two  masters,  God  and  Mammon, 
God  and  sin.  If  any  one  say  that  "  it  is  possible  for  this  to  be 
done  in  a  different  respect,  that  is,  to  serve  God  with  the  mind^ 
and  to  serve  sin  with  the  flesh^''  I  reply  that,  by  such  a  petty 
distinction  as  this,  the  general  aflSrmation  of  Christ  is  evaded, 
to  the  great  detriment  of  piety  and  divine  worship,  and  that  a 
wide  door  will  thus  be  opened  for  libertines  and  Pseudo-Nico- 
demites.  But  some  one  will  say,  "  The  apostle  expressly  af- 
firms this,  which  I  deny,  and  my  denial  will  be  supported  by 
the  phrases  themselves,  when  correctly  explained,  as  they  will 
soon  be  ;  for  this  man  serves  sin,  and  not  God. 

Thirdly.  From  the  perpetual  usage  of  the  Scriptures,  which 
are  not  accustomed  to  employ  these  restrictions  when  any  man 
is  said  to  serve  God,  or  to  serve  sin.  Wherefore,  since 
they  are  employed  in  this  passage,  it  is  exceedingly  prob- 
able that  the  same  thing  is  not  signified  by  these  different 
phrases. 

4.  But  the  subject  itself,  upon  which  the  apostle  here  treats, 
when  placed  plainly  before  the  eyes,  may  disclose  to  us  the 
true  meaning  of  these  phrases  ;  so  that  the  man  who  will  in- 
spect it  with  [probo]  honest  eyes,  and  with  eyes  desirous  to 
investigate  and  ascertain  the  truth  alone,  may  have  that  with 
which  to  satisfy  himself. 

The  apostle,  therefore,  here  makes  mention  of  four  laws. 
(1.)  The  law  of  God.  (2.)  The  law  of  sin.  (3.)  The  law  of 
the  mind.  (4.)  The  law  of  the  members.  They  are  opposed 
to  each  other  and  agree  together  in  the  following  manner  : 

"The  law  of  God,"  and  "  the  law  of  sin,"  are  directly  oppo- 
sed ;  as  are  likewise  "  the  law  of  the  mind,"  and  "  that  of  the 
members." 

"  The  law  of  God,"  and  "  the  law  of  the  mind,"  agree  to- 
gether ;  as  do  likewise  "  the  law  of  sin,"  and  "  the  law  of  the 
members." 

22  VOL  II. 


330 


JAMES  ABMINITS. 


From  this,  it  follows  that  "the  law  of  God,"  and  "  the  law 
of  the  members,"  are  indirectly  opposed  ;  as  are  also  "  the  law 
of  sin,"  and  "  that  of  the  mind." 

Bat  it  will  be  possible  to  render  these  things  more  intelligi- 
ble by  the  subjoined  diagram  : 

The  LA.W  OP    ^„    -r-    .7       ,  The  law  of 

God       ^^^^  directly  contrary— 


The  law  of 
the  mind 


— are  dir.dly  contrary- 


The  law  of 
the  members 


"  The  law  of  God"  and  "  the  law  of  sin,"  obtain  in  this 
place  the  principal  dignit  .  "The  Ir.w  of  the  mind"  and 
"  that  of  the  members"  are  placed  as  hand-maids  or  assistants 
to  them,  rendering  due  oervice  to  their  superiors ;  for  "  the 
mind  delights  in  the  law  of  God,"  and  "  the  law  of  the  mem- 
bers brings  a  man  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin."  (Kom. 
vii,  22,  23.)  These  things  being  premised,  I  proceed  to  the 
explanation. 

The  apostle  here  lays  down  two  lords,  who  are  completely 


DISSERTATION. 


331 


contrary  to  each  other,  and  directly  opposed,  God  and  sin — 
the  tornier  of  these,  the  hiwfiil  lord  ;  the  latter,  a  tyrant,  and, 
hy  violent  means,  usurping  dominion  over  man,  by  the  fault 
indeed  of  man  himself,  and  by  the  just  judgment  of  God.  Both 
of  them  impose  a  law  on  man.    God  imposes  his  law,  that  man 
may  obey  him  in  those  things  which  it  prescribes  ;  and  sin  im- 
poses its  law,  that  man  may  obey  it  in  "  the  lusts  thereof," 
which  it  proposes  by  a  certain  law  of  its  own.    The  former  is 
called  "  the  law  of  God     the  latter,  "  the  law  of  sin."    By  the 
former,  God  endeavors  to  lead  the  man,  who  is  placed  under 
the  law^  to  yield  obedience  to  him ;  by  the  latter,  sin  strives 
and  attempts,  by  every  kind  of  violence,  to  compel  the  man 
to  obey  him.    By  his  law,  God  prescribes  those  things  which 
are  "  holy,  and  just,  and  good     by  its  law,  sin  proposes  those 
things  which  are  useful,  pleasant,  and  agreeable  to  the  flesh. 
Xow  both  of  them,  God  and  sin,  have,  in  this  man  who  is  un- 
der the  law^  something  which  favors  their  several  causes  and 
purposes,  and  which  assents  to  each  of  these  laws.    God  ha& 
the  mind^  or  "  the  law  of  the  mind     sin  has  the  fleshy  or  the- 
law  of  the  flesh,  or  "  of  the  members."    The  mind^  consenting 
to  the  law  of  God,  that  it  "is  holy,  and  just,  and  good  ;"  the 
fleshy  assenting  to  the  law  of  sin,  that  it  is  useful,  pleasant  and 
agreeable  ;  "  the  law  of  the  mind,"  which  is  the  knowledge  of 
the  divine  law,  and  an  assent  to  it ;  "  the  law  of  the  membere,"^ 
which  is  [affectus]  an  inclination  and  propension  towards  those 
things  which  are  useful,  pleasant,  and  agreeable  to  the  flesh, 
that  is,  towards  these  mundane,  earthly  and  visible  objects. 

In  the  twenty-third  verse  of  this  chapter,  these  two  laws  are 
said  to  be,avT,^pa-rsuo,asvoi,  "  waging  war  together,"  like  soldiers 
who  are  in  the  field  of  battle,  and  drawn  up  in  hostile  array 
against  each  other,  that  the  one  army  may  overcome  that 
which  is  opposed  to  it,  and  may  gain  the  victory  for  its  lord 
and  general.  "  The  law  of  the  mind"  fights  for  "  the  law  of 
God,"  and  "the  law  of  the  members"  marches  under  the  ban- 
ner of  "  the  law  of  sin  ;"  the  former,  that,  after  having  con- 
quered the  flesh  and  the  law  of  the  members,  it  may  bring 
man  into  subjection  to  the  law  of  God,  with  this  design — that 
man  may  serve  God  ;  the  latter,  that^  after  having  overcome 


332  JAMES  ARMINIUS. 

the  law  of  the  mind,  it  may  sentence  man  to  bondage,  and 
"bring  him  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin,"  with  this  design 
— that  man  may  serve  sin. 

The  conflict  between  these  two  contending  parties,  is  about 
man,  whom  God  wishes  to  bring  into  subjection  to  himself; 
and  sin  eagerly  indulges  the  same  wish.  The  former  of  these 
prescribes  his  own  law  to  him  ;  the  latter  also  prescribes  its 
law ;  and  both  of  them  employ  their  own  military  forces,  that 
they  severally  have  in  the  man,  each  to  obtain  the  victory  for 
himself. 

From  these  explanations  ii.  will  now  appear  what  the  phra- 
ses signify;  "With  the  mind  to  serve  the  law  of  God,"  is, 
with  a  mind  consenting  to  the  law  of  God,  to  perform  its  mil- 
itary services  to  that  law,  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  man  into 
subjection  to  God  ;  "  With  the  flesh,  to  serve  the  law  of  sin,'* 
is  with  the  flesh  assenting  to  the  desires  of  sin,  to  render  its  mil- 
itary services  to  the  law  of  sin,  in  order  to  bring  man  into  cap- 
tivity to  that  law  and  to  subject  him  to  sin. 

The  end,  therefore,  or  the  intention  of  the  battle  is,  that  man 
may  be  brought  into  sul^jection  either  to  the  law  of  God,  or  to 
the  law  of  sin  ;  that  is,  that  he  may  walk  either  according  to 
the  flesh,  or  according  to  the  mind. 

The  act  'ending  to  this  end,  is  the  waging  of  war,  which  is 
indeed  actual  hostility,  and  an  inimical  encounter  between  the 
parties ;  but  it  is  also  the  employment  of  persuasion  towards 
man,  without  whose  assent  neither  party  can  obtain  this  its 
end.  The  mind,  adverse  to  the  flesh,  persuades  the  will  of  man 
to  do  that  which  is  holy,  and  just,  and  good,  and  to  reject 
what  is  merel}^  delectable.  The  flesh,  repugnant  to  the  mind, 
persuades  the  same  human  will  to  set  aside  and  disregard  that 
which  is  holy,  and  just,  and  good,  and  to  embrace  that  which 
is  capable  of  afibrding  present  delight  and  usefulness. 

The  eflect  produced  by  the  mind  on  the  will,  is  the  volition 
of  good  and  the  hatred  of  evil ;  the  effect  which  the  flesh  pro- 
duces on  the  same  will,  is  the  volition  of  evil  and  the  nolition 
of  good.  This  is  a  change  of  the  will,  first  to  one  party,  and 
then  to  the  other. 

But  the  issue  or  result  declares  which  of  the  two  parties  in 


DISSERTATION. 


333 


this  man  has  produced  the  stronger  and  more  powerful  effect. 
But  this  is  the  result  of  the  conflict,  [as  it  is  described  in  the 
twentj-third  verse,]  the  noivperformance  of  g'  od^  the  nonomis- 
sion  of  evil^  a  token  of  the  impotence  of  the  mind,  which  com- 
manded good  to  be  done,  and  forbade  the  commission  of  evil, 
which  approved  of  the  performance  of  good,  but  disapproved 
of  the  perpetration  of  evil ;  and  it  is  ihe  commission  of  what 
is  evil^  the  omission  of  what  is  good^  the  captivity  of  man  un- 
der the  law  of  sin,  plainly  demonstrating  that,  in  this  man, 
the  party  of  sin  and  of  the  flesh  is  the  more  powerful  of  the 
two,  the  law  of  the  mind  fruitlessly  striving  against  it. 

The  cause  of  this  result  is  the  weakness  of  the  law,  which 
has  been  debilitated  by  the  flesh,  (Rom.  viii,  3,)  and  the  force 
and  pertinacious  power  of  the  flesh  in  this  man,  the  efiect  of 
which  is,  that  the  man  does  not  walk  according  to  the  law  but 
according  to  the  flesh,  and  does  not  march  according  to  the 
law  of  the  mind  but  according  to  that  of  the  members. 

But  if  to  this  conflict  be  added  a  stronger  force  of  the  Spirit 
of  Christ,  who  does  not  write  the  letter  of  the  law  on  tables  of 
stone,  but  impresses  the  love  and  fear  of  God  on  the  fleshly 
tables  of  the  heart — then  are  we  permitted  not  only  to  hope 
for  a  different  result,  but  it  is  also  given  ns  assuredly  to  obtain 
a  successful  issue.  This  is  indicated  by  the  apostle  in  Rom. 
viii,  2  :  "  For  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  hath 
made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."  For  it  comes 
to  pass,  by  means  of  the  power  of  this  Spirit,  that  the  man, 
who  had  previously  been  brought  into  captivity  to  the  law 
of  sin,"  is  delivered  from  it,  and  "  no  longer  walks  after  the 
flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit ;"  that  is,  in  his  life,  he  follows  the 
motion,  [actum]  the  influence,  and  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  which  motion,  influence  and  guidance  tend  indeed  to 
the  same  end  as  that  to  which  the  law  of  God,  and  the  law  of 
the  mind,  endeavored  to  lead  the  man,  but  with  an  energy  not 
equal ;  as  not  being  able  to  complete  their  attempt,  on  account 
of  the  hindrance  of  the  law  of  sin  and  of  the  members.  This 
is  likewise  the  cause  why  this  man  is  said  to  walk  not  accord- 
ing to  the  law  of  the  mind,  but  according  to  the  Spirit,  [a 
phrase  frequently  employed  by  the  apostle  in  Romans  viii,] 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


and  "  to  be  led  of  the  Spirit,  and  not  to  be  under  the  law," 
(Gal.  V,  18.)  'Not  indeed  because  the  man  who  lives  accord- 
ing to  the  Spirit,  does  not  live  according  to  the  law  of  God ; 
but  because  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  and  not  the  law,  is  the  cause 
why  the  man  regulates  his  life  according  to  the  law  of  God. 
For  the  law  knows  how  to  command,  but  cannot  afford  any 
assistance — a  doctrine  which  St.  Augustine  frequently  incul- 
cates. 

5.  From  these  observations,  ii;  may  now  be  evident,  that 
even  from  this  (25th)  verse,  nothing  can  be  adduced  in  proof 
of  the  contrary  opinion  ;  but  that  the  opinion  which  explains 
the  passage  as  referring  to  a  man  under  the  law,  is  also  estab- 
lished by  this  verse.  For  this  man,  as  he  is  wider  the  law^ 
"  with  his  mind  serves  the  law  of  God  ;"  but,  as  he  is  carnal^ 
"  with  his  flesh  he  serves  the  law  of  sin,"  and  he  serves  it  so 
as  to  bring  himself  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin — his  mind 
and  conscience  vainly  struggling  against  it. 

NoY  is  it  of  the  least  service  for  the  establishment  of  the 
other  opinion,  that  the  apostle  says,  "  I  myself;"  for  he  had 
previously  used  the  word  'T'  in  many  instances  in  this  chap- 
ter, even  when  he  said,  ''Sin  wrought  in  me  all  manner  of 
concupiscence  (verse  8  ;)  "  for  I  lived,"  or  I  was  alive, 
"  without  the  law  once  ;  but,  when  the  commandment  came, 
I  died  ;"  (9  ;)  "  I  found  the  commandment  to  be  unto  death 
tome;"  (10;)  "  Sin,  taking  occasion  by  the  commandment, 
deceived  me,  and  by  it  slew  me,"  (11,)  and  other  passages. 
But  the  pronoun,  au-ro^,  [in  our  English  version,  translated 
"  myself,"]  which  is  an  adjunct  to  the  pronoun  "I,"  indicates 
that  this  pronoun  "  I"  must  be  referred  to  the  person  about 
whom  he  had  been  previously  treating.  For  it  is  the  demon- 
strative [pronoun]  of  the  nearest  antecedent ;  as  though  he  had 
said,  "  I  am  he  about  whom  I  have  already  been  discoursing." 
This  is  likewise  evident,  because  he  concludes  from  the  pre- 
ceding verses,  that  the  man  whose  character  he  took  on  him 
self  to  personate,  (the  prudence  of  [him  who  was  under  the 
influence  of]  the  Holy  Spirit  requiring  such  personation,) 
"with  his  mind  serves  the  law  of  God,  but  with  his  flesh  the 
law  of  sin."    Let  those  things  be  taken  into  consideration 


DISSERTATION. 


335 


which,  iu  his  epistle,  the  apostles  writes  concerning  himself, 
and  let  them  be  compared  with  the  particulars  of  the  descrip- 
tion here  given ;  and  it  will  then  clearly  appear,  that  the 
apostle,  in  this  passage,  was  by  no  means  treating  about  him- 
self, such  as  he  was  at  that  time. 


III.  KECAPITULATION. 

1.  What  distinctly  helongs  to  the  man  described  in  this  chap- 
ter^ hoth  as  he  is  under  the  law,  and  ae  he  is  carnal  and 
the  slave  of  sin.  2.  The  inconsistent  state  of  a  man  who  is 
under  the  law.  3.  The  manner  in  which  God  leads  a  sin- 
ner to  penitence,  faith  in  Christ,  and  the  obedience  of 
faith.  4.  This  representation  of  it  confirmed  by  St.  Au- 
gustine and  Musculus — How  far  this  is  the  work  of  the  re- 
generating Spirit.  5.  To  this  it  is  objected  that  a  three- 
fold state  of  man  is  thus  laid  down — A  reply  to  this  objection, 

1.  But  now,  if  not  disagreeable,  let  all  these  things  be  col- 
lected together,  and  in  a  compendious  form  be  exhibited  be- 
fore the  eyes,  that  they  may  at  one  glance  be  examined,  and 
a  judgment  formed  concerning  them. 

THE  MAN  ABOUT  WHOM  THE  APOSTLE  IS  HERE  TREATING,  SO  FAR 

AS  HE  IS 


UNDER  THE  LAW. 

He  allows  not,  or  approves 
not  of,  that  which  he  does ; 

He  wills  indeed  that  which 
is  good ; 

He  hates  evil ; 

He  consents  to  the  law  of 
God  that  it  is  good  ; 

He  has  it  [in  him]  to  will 
that  which  is  good  ; 


CARNAL  AND  THE  SLAVE  OF  SIN. 

He  does  that  which  he  al- 
lows not,  or  of  which  he  dis- 
approves. 

But  he  does  no  t  wha  t  is  good. 

And  yet  he  does  that  which 
is  evd. 

Yet  he  does  that  which  he 
would  not. 

But  he  finds  evil  present 
with  him,  and  he  finds  not 
{howl  to  perform  what  is  good. 


336  JAMES  AKMISriUS. 


UNDER  THE  LAW.  CARNAL  AND  THE  SLAVE  OF  SIN. 

It  is  no  longer  himself  that  But  the  evil  is  done  hy  sin 

does  evil ;  which  dwelleth  in  him. 

He  truly  delights  Iq  the  law  But  he  has  another  law  in 

of  God  after  the  inward  man  ;  his  members. 

According  to  the  law  of  his  Bat  the  law  of  his  members 

mind  he   wages   war  with  wages  war  against  the  la^  of 

the  law  of  his  members  ;  his  mind^  so  as  to  bring  the 

man  into  captivity  to  the  law 
of  sin. 

This  causes  him  to  exclaim,  From  this  misery^  and  the 

Who  shall  deliver  me  body  of  this  death  f 

With  his  mind,  therefore,  But  with  his  flesh  he  serves 

lie  serves  the  law  of  God ;  the  law  of  sin. 

The  things  which  are  thus  opposed  to  each  other  must  not 
be  disjoined,  while  thej  are  attributed  to  the  man  about  whom 
the  apostle  here  treats  ;  but  they  ought  both  to  be  united  to- 
gether, and  jointly  attributed  to  him.  For  this  is  required  by 
[ratio']  the  analogy  of  the  subject  itself  that  is  under  the  law 
and  the  dominion  of  sin — as  he  is  under  the  law^  the  particu- 
lars enumerated  in  the  first  column  belong  to  him — as  he  is 
under  the  dominion  of  sin,  those  in  the  second  column  are  his 
attributes. 

But  the  mode  by  which  the  apostle  joins  these  things  with 
each  other,  and  attributes  them  to  this  man  in  a  conjoint  form^ 
is  that  of  a  disjunctive  enunciation.  This  is  indicated  by  the 
frequent  use  of  the  particle,  ^s,  which  is  the  post-positive  of 
fxsv  itself,  or  what  immediately  follows  it.  The  one  without 
the  other  does  not  render  a  sentence  complete  ;  but  |t^^£v,  "  in- 
deed, truly,"  denotes  that  something  will  follow,  and  <5£,  "  but, 
yet,  then,"  that  something  has  preceded,  with  which  the  for- 
mer or  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence  ought  to  be  joined. 
This  remark  must  be  diligently  observed  in  the  consideration 
of  Romans  vii,  as  must  likewise  the  following — that  both  parts 
are  not  of  the  same  order  and  dignity,  but  that  the  latter  clause 
[in  which     is  used  as  the  connecting  word]  is  the  chief  and 


DISSERTATION. 


337 


principal  one,  for  whose  explanation,  illustration  and  amplifi- 
cation, the  former  clanse  [in  which  /j-sv  occurs]  is  employed; 
as  a  proposition,  or  the  first  part  of  a  sentence,  is  fur  its  ren- 
dition or  concluding  part.  Those  latter  particulars,  therefore, 
[which  are  here  inserted  in  the  second  column,]  belong  to  the 
more  ample  explanation  and  proof  of  the  proper  cause,  on  ac- 
count of  which  a  man  who  is  under  the  law  cannot  resist  sin, 
but  sin  has  the  dominion  over  him.  But  the  former  particu- 
lars [enumerated  in  the  first  column]  belong  or  conduce  to  the 
excusing  of  the  law,  lest  the  blame  of  this  crime  could  be  just- 
ly ascribed  to  it.  From  all  which  things  united  together  the 
conclusion  may  be  drawn  that  the  man  about  whom  the  apos- 
tle is  treating,  must,  on  account  of  the  predominant  flesh  and 
of  sin  which  dwells  in  his  flesh,  be  still  reckoned  in  the  num- 
ber of  carnal  persons.  But,  because  he  is  under  the  law,  and 
so  under  it  that  it  has  effected  in  him  whatever  is  usually  ef- 
fected by  the  law  in  transferring  and  conducting  man  as  a 
sinner  to  the  grace  of  Christ,  he  must  {^jpropediem^  almost  at 
any  hour,]  speedily  be  taken  out  from  the  number  of  carnal 
persons,  and  placed  in  a  state  of  grace  ;  in  which  higher  state, 
he  will  no  longer  be  put  to  the  necessity  of  fighting,  under  the 
auspices  and  guidance  of  the  law,  against  the  vigorous  and 
lively  "motions  of  sins;"  but,  by  the  power  of  grace  and  un- 
der the  guidance  and  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  will  con- 
tend against  his  crucified  and  mortified  \affectu8^\  inclinations, 
till  he  obtain  over  them,  w4ien  they  are  nearly  dead  and 
buried,  a  complete  victory. 

2.  The  man  who  will  reflect  upon  this  inconsistent  state,  if 
I  may  so  denominate  it,  will  easily  perceive,  that  the  things 
which  the  apostle  has  here  written,  must  be  referred  to  this 
state.  For,  diligently,  and  as  if  purposely,  he  exercises  cau- 
tion over  himself,  not  to  em})loy  the  word  "  Spirit"  in  any  pas- 
sage in  his  description  of  this  state  ;  yet  this  word,  the  use  of 
which  he  here  so  carefully  avoids,  is  that  which  he  employs  in 
almost  every  verse  of  the  next  chapter,  (Rom,  viii,)  and  which 
is  so  familiar  to  this  apostle  in  all  his  epistles,  as  to  seem  to 
be  perpetually  before  his  eyes  and  his  mind,  especially  when 
he  is  treating  about  the  regenerate  and  their  duty  to  God  and 


338 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


their  neig]il)or,  and  also  when  he  treats  upon  the  contest  which 
the  pious  still  hav^e  with  the  flesh  and  the  remains  of  sin. 
The  thouL^htfui  consideration  of  this  single  matter  is  able  and 
ought  to  cause  doubts  in  the  minds  of  tliose  who  interpret  this 
portion  of  holy  writ  as  applicable  to  regenerate  persons  and 
those  who  are  placed  under  grace,  if  they  only  be  animated 
with  a  sincere  desire  of  ascertaining  the  truth,  and  love  the 
truth  for  its  own  sake,  even  when  it  does  not  agree  with  their 
own  preconceived  opinions. 

3.  I  am  also  desirous  that  all  men  seriously  consider  how 
God  leads  us  to  faith  in  his  Son,  and  to  the  obedience  of  faith, 
and  what  means  he  uses  to  convert  a  sinner.  We  know  that 
God  employs  liis  holy  word  to  produce  this  effect;  we  know 
that  this  word  consists  of  two  essential  and  integral  parts,  the 
law  and  the  gospel ;  we  know,  also,  that  the  law  must  first  be 
preached  to  a  sinner,  that  he  may  understand  and  approve  it, 
that  he  may  explore  and  examine  his  life  by  it  when  it  is 
known  and  approved,  that,  when  such  examination  is  comple- 
ted, he  ma)'  acknowledge  himself  to  be  a  sinner,  and  by  his  de- 
merits deserving  of  damnation,  that  he  may  mourn  and  be 
sorrowful  on  account  of  sin,  and  may  detest  it,  that  he  may 
understand  himself  to  be  in  urgent  need  of  a  deliverer,  and 
that  he  may  be  instigated  and  compelled  to  seek  him. 

To  a  man  who  is  thus  prepared  by  the  law,  the  grace  of  the 
gospel  must  be  announced,  which,  being  manifested  to  the 
mind  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  by  the  same  Spirit  sealed  on  the 
heart,  produces  faith  within  us,  by  which  we  are  united  to 
Christ;  that,  holding  communion  with  him,  we  may  obtain 
remission  of  sins  in  his  name,  and  may  draw  from  him  the 
vivifying  power  of  his  Spirit.  By  this  quickening  power,  the 
flesh  is  mortified  with  its  affections  and  lusts,  and  we  are  re- 
generated to  a  new  life,  in  which  we  not  only  will  or  resolve 
to  bring  forth  the  fruits  of  gratitude  to  God,  but  we  are  like- 
wise capable  to  bring  them  forth,  and  actually  do  so  by  this 
same  Spirit,  "  who  worketh  in  us  both  to  will  and  to  do^ 

Let  any  man  now  describe  to  me  out  of  the  Scriptures  the 
proper  effects  which  flow  from  the  preacMng  of  the  law,  in 
the  minds  of  those  whom  God  has  decreed  to  convert  to  a  bet- 


DISSERTATION. 


339 


ter  life  ;  and  I  will  instantly  present  to  him  a  man,  such  as 
he  who  is  described  to  us  bj  the  apostle,  under  his  own  per- 
son, in  this  chapter,  (Horn,  vii.)  "But  are  these  effects 
through  the  preaching  of  the  law  produced  in  this  man,  with- 
out the  grace  of  Christ,  and  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
What  man  can  have  the  audacity  to  affirm  this,  unless  he  be 
one  of  the  prime  defenders  of  Pelagian  doctrine  ?  He  who, 
by  the  preaching  of  the  law,  (the  Holy  Spirit  blessing  such 
preaching,  and  co-operating  with  it,)  is  compelled  to  flee  to 
the  grace  of  Christ,  is  not  instantly,  or  at  once,  under  grace,  or 
under  the  influence,  guidance  and  government  of  the  Spirit. 
For,  "  the  law  is  our  schoolmaster  [to  bring  us]  unto  Christ." 
(Gal.  iii,  24.)  "  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  for  righteousness 
to  every  one  that  believe^h."  (Kom.  x,  4.)  "  By  the  law  is 
the  knowledge  of  sin."  (iii,  20.) 

4.  St.  Augustine,  when  treating  upon  the  use  of  the  law, 
says,  in  his  Bej)ly  to  the  two  epistles  of  the  Pelagians  to  Boni- 
face^ "  The  law,  as  a  schoolmaster,  leads  and  conducts  a  man 
to  this  grace  of  God,  by  terrifying  him  concerning  his  trans- 
gressions of  the  law^,  that  {guodT^  something  may  be  conferred 
on  him  which  it  was  not  able  to  bestow."  And  in  a 
subsequent  passage,  "'We  do  not,  therefore,  make  void  the 
law  through  faith,  but  we  establish  the  law%'  which,  by  terri- 
fying men,  leads  them  to  faith.  Therefore,  '  because  the  law 
worketli  wrath,'  that  grace  may  bestow,  on  the  man  who  is 
thus  terrified  and  {coverso']  turned  to  fulfill  the  righteousness 
of  the  law,  the  mercy  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord, 
who  is  the  wisdom  of  God,  and  concerning  whom  it  is  written, 
He  heareth  in  his  tongue  law  and  mercy.  Law,  by  which  he 
may  terrify — Mekcy,  by  which  he  may  afford  relief;  law  by 
a  servant — mercy,  by  himself,"  &c.,  &c.    {Lih.  4,  cap.  5.) 

Let  St.  Augustine  also  be  consulted,  in  his  treatise  on  cor- 
reption  and  grace.^  in  the  first  chapter  of  which  he  speaks  thus 
appropriately  to  the  matter  under  discussion  :  "The  Lord 
himself  has  not  only  shewn  us  from  what  evil  we  may  turn 
aside,  and  what  good  we  may  perform,  which  the  letter  of  the 
law  alone  is  able  to  shew ;  but  he  also  assists  us,  that  w^e  m.ay 
turn  aside  from  evil  and  may  do  good,  which  no  one  can  do 


340 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


without  the  Spirit  of  grace.  If  this  grace  be  wanticg,  the  law 
is  present  for  this  purpose — to  bring  us  in  guilty  and  to  kill 
us,  on  which  account,  the  apostle  says,  The  letter  killeih^  lut 
the  Spirit  giveth  life.  (2  Cor.  iii,  6.)  He,  therefore,  who  law- 
fully uses  the  law,  learns  in  it  evil  and  good  ;  and,  not  confi- 
ding in  his  own  \yirtute'\  strength,  he  flees  to  grace,  [([ua 
proBstante]  by  the  aid  of  which  he  ceases  from  evil  and  does 
good.  But  what  man  thus  flees  to  grace,  except  when  his 
steps  are  directed  hy  the  Lord^  and  he  delighteth  i?i  his  way  ? 
(Psalm  xxxvii,  23.)  And  by  this  also,  the  act  of  desiring  the 
assistance  of  grace  is  the  beginning  of  grace." 

Consult  also  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  same  treatise,  in  which 
the  following  passage  occurs  :  "  You  are  not  willing  to  have 
your  faults  pointed  out.  You  are  unwilling  that  they  should 
be  smitten,  and  that  you  should  feel  useful  grief,  which  may 
induce  you  to  seek  a  physician.  You  are  not  desirous  to  have 
yourself  shewn  to  yourself,  that  when  you  perceive  your  own 
[mental]  deformity  you  may  be  very  importunate  for  a  refor- 
mation of  yourself,  and  may  supplicate  God  not  to  sufier  you 
to  remain  in  this  foul  and  deformed  condition." 

And  in  the  sixth  chapter,  he  says :  *'  Therefore,  let  the 
damnable  origin  be  reprehended,  that  [voluntas]  a  willingness 
for  regeneration  may  arise  out  of  the  sorrow  consequent  on 
Buch  reprehension  ;  yet,  if  he  who  is  thus  chastised  be  a  son  of 
the  promise,  that,  when  the  noise  of  the  correction  sounds 
outwardly  and  the  strokes  of  the  whip  are  heard,  God  may 
work  inwardly  in  him  also  to  will  by  his  secret  inspiration." 

Musculus  says,  in  his  Common  Places,  in  the  chapter  On 
Laws,  (fol.  124,)  "  The  law  causes  me  not  only  to  understand, 
but  likewise  with  anguish  and  remorse  of  conscience  to  feel 
and  experience  that  sin  is  in  me.  The  proper  effect  of  the 
law  is,  that  it  convicts  us  of  being  inexcusably  guilty  of  sin, 
subjects  us  to  the  curse,  and  condemns  us,  (Gal.  iii,)  and  when 
we  are  deeply  afifected  with  [sensti']  the  smart  of  sin  and  con- 
demnation, it  renders  us,  anxious  and  earnest  in  our  desires  for 
the  grace  of  God.  Hence,  arises  that  of  the  apostle,  which  is 
the  subject  of  his  investigation  in  Romans  vii,  and  at  the  close 
of  which  he  exclaims,  0  wretched  man  that  I  am !  who  shall 


DISSERTATION. 


341 


deliver  me  from  the  'body  of  this  death  7    The  grace  of  Gor> 

THROUGH  J ESUS  ChRIST." 

"  But  is  this,  therefore,  the  work  of  the  regenerating 
Spirit?"  With  regard  to  the  end,  I  confess  that  it  is  ;  but 
with  regard  to  the  effect  itself,  I  dare  not  make  any  assertion^ 
For  mortificatiou  and  vivification,  which,  as  integral  parts, 
contain  the  whole  of  regeneration,  are  completed  in  ns  by  our 
participation  of  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ.  (Rom  vi.) 
In  Romans  viii,  15,  the  apostle  distinguishes  between  "  the 
Spirit  of  bondage  to  fear,"  and  "  the  Spirit  of  adoption." 
Many  pei-sons  denominate  the  former  of  these,  '*  a  legal  Spirit," 
and  the  latter  "  the  Sphit  of  the  gospel  of  Christ."  I,  there- 
fore, make  the  service  of  the  Spirit  of  bondage  to  precede  that 
of  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  though  both  of  them  tend  to  one 
design.  Whence,  it  appears  that  this  my  explanation  of  the 
seventh  chapter  is  not  contrary  to  the  true  doctrine  cojicevjiing 
the  laiD  and  its  iise^  and  the  necessity  cf  the  gra^ce  of  Christ  ^ 
but  that  the  doctors  of  the  church,  who  give  a  different  inter- 
pretation of  it,  have  not  reflected  on  this  matter  when  they 
entered  on  an  explanation  of  the  chapter.  For,  since  they 
teach,  from  the  Scriptures,  the  very  same  thing  as  I  suppose 
the  apostle  here  to  make  the  subject  of  his  investigation,  we 
do  not  differ  from  each  other  in  our  opinion  of  doctrines,  but 
only  in  this  single  circumstance — that  they  do  not  think  this 
passage  relates  to  that  head  of  doctrine,  which,  I  affirm,  is 
protessedly  treated  in  it :  Yet,  in  this  opinion,  I  do  not  stand 
alone,  but  I  have  many  others  with  me,  as  we  shall  afterwards 
perceive. 

5.  Some  one  may  here  object,  "  that  by  this,  my  explana- 
tion, a  three-fold  state  of  man  is  laid  down,  when  the  Scrip- 
tures acknowledge  but  a  two-fold  state ;  and  that  three  kinds 
of  men  are  introduced,  when  no  more  than  two  are  known  to 
the  Scriptures — that  is,  the  state  of  regeneration  and  that 
which  precedes  regeneration,  believers  and  unbelievers,  re- 
generate and  unregenerate  men,"  &c. 

To  this  I  reph^,  (1,)  that  in  my  explanation  three  consistent 
states  of  men  are  not  laid  down,  neither  are  there  three  dis- 
tinct and  perfectly  opposite  kinds  of  men  ;  but  that  it  teaches 


342 


JAMES  ARMUaUS. 


[g^uantum]  how  much  the  law  has  the  power  of  effecting  in  a 
man,  and  how  the  same  individual  is  compelled  by  the  law  to 
flee  to  the  grace  of  Christ. 

(2.)  I  say  that  the  state  of  the  man  described  in  this  chapter 
is  not  a  comsistent  one,  but  is  rather  a  grade  or  step  from  the 
one  to  the  other — from  a  state  of  impiety  and  injidtltty  to  a 
state  of  regeneration  and  grace — from  the  old  state  in  Adam 
to  the  new  state  in  Cbrist.  According  to  this  grade  or  step, 
the  man  is  denominated  by  some  persons  renascent^  [or  in  the 
article  of  being  born  again].  And,  truly,  the  distance  of  the 
one  of  these  states  from  the  other  is  far  too  great,  for  a  man 
to  be  able  to  pass  from  one  to  the  other  without  some  inter- 
mediate steps. 

(3.)  I  deny  that  there  is  any  absurdity  in  laying  down  a 
three-fold  state  of  man,  regard  being  had  to  the  dilferent  times; 
that  is,  a  state  before  or  wtthout  the  law,  one  under  the  law^ 
and  another  under  grace.  For  the  apostolical  Scriptures  make 
mention  of  such  a  three-fold  state  in  the  two  chapters  now 
under  consideration,  and  in  Horn,  vi,  and  vii,  and  Gal.  iv, 
and  V. 

St.  Augustine  says,  in  his  book,  The  Exposition  of  certain 
Propositions  in  the  Ejjistle  to  the  Romans,  (Gap.  3  :)  There- 
fore we  distinguish  the  four  [^gradus]  conditions  of  man,  into 
that  BEFOEE  the  law,  ukdee  the  law^  under  grace,  and  in  ])eace. 
In  the  state  lefore  the  law,  we  follow  the  lusts  of  the  flesh ; 
under  the  law,  we  are  drawn  along  with  them  ;  under  grace^ 
we  neither  follow  those  lusts,  nor  are  drawn  by  them  ;  inpeace^ 
there  is  no  lusting  of  the  flesh.  Before  the  law,  therefore,  we 
do  not  fight ;  under  the  law,  we  fight,"  c&c,  &c. 

Consult  also  Bucer,  in  his  commentary  on  this  passage.  For 
he  lays  down  a  three-fold  man,  (1,)  a  profane  man  who  does 
not  yet  believe  in  God,  (2,)  a  holy  man  who  loves  God,  but 
who  is  weak  to  prevail  against  sin,  and  (3,)  lastly,  a  man  fur- 
nished with  a  stronger  portion  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  so  that 
be  is  able,  not  only  to  repress  and  condemn  the  flesh,  but  like- 
wise to  live,  in  reality,  the  life  of  God,  with  pleasure,  and 
with  confirmed  and  perpetual  [studio']  diligence.  Let,  there- 
fore, the  whole  of  his  commentary  on  this  passage  be  perused, 


DISSERTATION. 


343 


and  it  will  appear  tliat,  with  respect  to  the  substance  of  the 
matter,  the  ditfereiice  is  very  slight  between  his  explanation 
of  it,  and  that  which  I  have  now  given.  This  I  shall  also 
clearlj  prove,  in  tlie  following  chapter,  by  passages  cited  from 
the  same  commentary. 

But  let  us  see  whether  the  Scriptures  themselves  do  not,  in 
many  places,  propose  three  kinds  of  men,  and  give  us  a  de- 
scription of  a  three-fold  state.    In  Eev.  iii,  15,  16,  some  per- 
sons are  described,  as  being  neither  hot  nor  cold^  but  liilce- 
warm.    Christ  says  that  he  came  not  to  call  to  repentance 
"  the  righteous,"  that  is,  those  who  esteemed  themselves  as 
such,  but  "  sinnei'S,"  that  is,  those  who  owned  themselves,  or 
who,  on  his  preaching,  would  owm  themselves  to  be  of  that 
description.  (Matt,  ix,  13.)    Christ  calls  to  himself  those  who 
are  latigued,  weary,  heavy-laden,  and  oppressed  with  the  bur- 
den of  their  sins,  (Matt,  xi,  28,)  but  drives  away  from  him 
those  who  are  proud  and  puffed  up  with  arrogance  on  account 
of  their  own  righteousness.  (Luke  xviii,  9.)    "  Jesus  said  unto 
them,  If  ye  were  blind,  ye  should  have  no  sin  ;  but  now  ye 
say.  We  see  ;  therefore,  your  sin  remaineth."  (John  ix,  41.) 
In  the  parable  of  the  Pharisee  and  the  Publican,  is  intimated 
to  us  a  three-fold  description  of  men — one  kind  in  the  Phari- 
see, two  kinds  in  the  Publican,  one  hefare  his  justification,  the 
other  after  it.    But  who  can  enumerate  all  the  similar  in- 
stances ?    Indeed,  such  enumeration  is  unnecessary.    It  is 
rather  a  matter  of  surprise,  that,  as  the  books  of  our  divines 
are  filled  with  such  distinctions,  they  did  not  occur  to  their 
minds  when  meditating  on  this  passage,  in  which  this  matter 
[of  the  difi'erent  conditions  or  states  of  man]  is  professedly 
treated. 


844 


JAMES  AKMINTUS. 


TV.  THE  CONNECTION  BETWEEN"  THE  SEVENTH  AND  THE 

EIGHTH  CHAPTEKS. 

1.  The  truth  of  the  interpretation  of  the  seventh  chapter^  as 
it  has  been  so  far  deduced  hy  the  author^  is  proved  from 
some  of  the  early  verses  of  the  eighth  chapter  when  coin- 
pared  with  those  wi  ich  p  'ecide  them.  2.  The  first  verse. 
3.  The  second  verse^  and  an  explanation  of  the  phrases 
used  in  it.  4.  The  third  verse.  A  comparison  of  the  for- 
mer  part  of  it  with  Rom.  vii,  5  and  14,  and  of  the  latter 
part  of  it  with  the  sixth  verse  of  the  same  chapter.  5.  The 
fourth  verse.,  and  a  comparison  of  it  with  Rom.  vii,  4.  A 
paraphrastical  recapitulation  of  those  things  which  are 
taught  i?i  the  first  four  verses  of  the  eighth  chapter,  and 
their  connection  with  the  preceding  chapter. 

1.  But  I  may  now  be  permitted  to  confirm  this  my  inter- 
pretation from  some  of  the  first  of  the  verses  of  the  next 
chapter,  provided  they  be  diligently  compared  with  those  in 
the  seventh  chapter. 

2.  For,  in  the  first  verse.,  a  conclusion  is  inferred  from  the 
verses  of  the  preceding  chapter,  which  is  agreeable  and  ac- 
commodated to  the  principal  design  proposed  by  the  apostle 
through  the  whole  of  this  epistle.    The  words  are  these: 

There  is,  therefore,  now  no  condemnation  to  them  who  are 
in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the 
Spirit." 

That  this  verse  contains  a  conclusion,  is  evident  from  the 
illative  particle  "  therefore,"  and  indeed  a  conclusion  not  de- 
duced from  the  former  part  of  the  last  verse  in  the  seventh 
chapter,  but  from  the  entire  investigation,  which  consists  of 
these  two  parts :  "  Men  do  not  obtain  righteousness,  and 
power  to  conquer  sin  and  to  live  in  a  holy  manner,  by  means 
either  of  the  law  of  nature  or  that  of  Moses ;  but,  through 
the  faith  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  tliose  \%vy  blessings 
are  gratuitously  bestowed  on  them  who  work  not,  but  believe 
on  Christ."  But  these  two  things,  justificaiton  which  con- 
sists of  remission  of  sins,  and  the  Spirit  [sanctificationis']  of 


DISSERTATION. 


345 


HOLINESS  by  which  believers  are  enabled  to  overcome  sin  and 
to  live  in  a  holy  manner,  are  parts  of  the  gracious  covenant 
into  which  God  has  entered  with  us  in  Christ :  "  I  will  put 
my  laws  into  their  minds,  and  write  them  in  their  hearts,  &c. ; 
for  I  will  be  merciful  to  their  unrighteousness,  and  their  sins 
and  their  iniquities  will  I  remember  no  more."  (Heb.  viii,  10, 
12.)  Therefore,  when  the  apostle  had  proceeded  so  far  with 
the  proof  of  this  thesis,  (having  in  the  first  five  chapters 
treated  on  righteousness  and  remission  of  sins^  and  in  the 
sixth  and  seventh  chapters,  on  the  'power  to  conquer  sin  and 
live  in  a  holy  manner^  he  now  infers  this  conclusion  :  "There 
is,  therefore,  now  no  condemnation  to  them  who  are  in  Christ 
Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit." 

The  emphasis  of  the  conclusion  lies  in  these  words  :  "  Who 
are  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk,  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the 
Spirit,"  to  the  exclusion  of  those  who  are  under  the  law,  and 
for  whom  is  prepared  certain  condemnation,  as  being  persons 
out  of  Christ,  and  subjected  to  the  dominion  of  sin — as  if  the 
apostle  had  said,  "  From  all  these  things,  therefore,  it  is  ap- 
parent that  condemnation  impends  over  all  those  who  are 
under  the  law,  because  they  neither  perform  the  law,  nor  are 
able  to  perform  it ;  but  that  freedom  from  condemnation  is^ 
granted  only  to  those  who  are  in  Christy  and  who  walk  accord- 
ing to  the  Spirit y 

But  that  the  emphasis  lies  in  these  words  :  "Those  who  are 
in  Christ  Jesus,"  to  the  exclusion  of  the  others,  is  apparent, 

(1.)  From  the  fact,  that  this  very  part  is  repeated  though 
in  other  words,  which  are  these,  "  who  walk  after  the  Spirit." 

(2.)  Because  the  exclusion  of  other  persons  is  openly  placed 
in  the  repetition,  "  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh," 

(3.)  From  the  subject,  itself,  of  the  apostle's  investigation, 
which  is  this  :  "  The  gospel  and  not  the  law,  is.the  power  of 
God  to  salvation  to  those  who  believe  and  do  not  work." 
Wherefore,  in  order  that  the  conclusion  may  correspond  with 
the  proposition,  it  ought  to  be  read  and  understood  with  the 
opposition  here  produced. 

(4.)  From  other  conclusions  in  this  epistle,  inferred  in  simi- 
lar cases — "  therefore,  we  conclude  that  a  man  is  justified  by 

22  TOL.  II. 


346 


JAMBS  ARMINItTS. 


faith  without  the  deeds  of  the  law,"  (Eom.  iii,  28,)  also,  in  the 
twenty  seventh  verse  of  the  same  chapter,  "  Where  is  boasting 
then  ?  It  is  excluded.  By  what  law  ?  By  that  of  works  ? 
No ;  but  by  the  law  of  faith."  "  But  it  was  written-^  for  us 
also,  to  whom  it  shall  be  imputed,"  that  is,  to  those  who  "  be- 
lieve on  him  that  raised  up  Jesus  our  Lord  from  the  dead." 
iv,  2-1:.)  And  it  appears  that  these  things  are  spoken  in 
opposition,  to  the  complete  exclusion  of  another  opposite, 
thus  :  "  But  to  him  that  worketh  not,  but  believeth  on  Him 
that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is  accounted  for  riirhteous- 
ness."  (iv,  5.)  "  For  the  promise  was  not  made  to  Abraham 
through  the  law,  but  through  the  righteousness  of  faith."  (13.) 
"  Ye  are  become  dead  to  the  law,  that  ye  should  be  married  to 
Christ."  (vii,  4.)  As,  likewise,  in  the  passage  at  present  under 
consideration,  "  There  is,  therefore,  now  no  condemnation  to 
them  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh, 
but  after  the  Spirit." 

From  these  remarks,  it  is  apparent  that  the  words  ''Kot 
after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit,"  do  not  belong  to  the  de- 
scription either  of  the  subject  or  of  the  attribute  of  the  pre- 
ceding conclusion,  as  if  they  were  described  w/io  are  in  Christ, 
but  that  they  are  the  consequent  or  the  antecedent  itself  of 
the  same  conclusion,  though  enunciated  in  a  form  somewhat 
different.  This  is  likewise  evident  from  the  very  words  ;  for 
the  pronoun,  tojs-,  "  those,"  which  is  properly  subservient  to 
this  matter,  is  not  used  in  this  clause. 

3.  The  same  thing  is  taught  in  the  second  verse,  in  which 
these  two  things  are  united,  "  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in 
Christ  Jestjs,"  that  have  reference  to  these  two  things  in  the 
preceding  verse,  "  those  in  Christ  Jesus,"  and  walking  after 
the  Spirit."  But  let  us  inspect  the  verse  itself,  which  reads 
thus  :  "  For  the  law  of  the  b-'pirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  hath 
made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death." 

Before  we  compare  this  verse  with  that  which  preceded  it, 
we  must  give  a  preliminary  explanation  of  the  phrases  used 
in  it.  "  The  law  of  the  Spirit"  is,  therefore,  called  [  jus]  the 
right,  the  power,  and  the  force  or  virtue  of  the  Holy  Spirit ; 
for  the  apostle  continues  in  the  mode  of  speaking  which  he 


DISSERTATION.  34:7 

had  previously  adopted  in  the  seventh  chapter,  where  he 
attnl)utes  a  law  to  sin^  to  the  mind  and  to  the  memters^  that 
is,  the  power  and  force  of  commanding  and  impelling.  The 
Spirit  is  here  called  that  "of  life,"  that  is,  "the  vivifying 
Spirit,"  by  a  phrase  familiar  to  the  Hebrews,  who  employ  the 
genitive  cises  of  substantives  instead  of  adjectives  ;  as  "  the 
city  of  God,"  "  the  man  of  God,"  "the  God  of  justice,"  &c. 
But  the  Spirit*is  thus  designated  in  opposition  or  distinction  to 
the  law  of  the  letter,  or  the  letter  of  the  law,  which  is  weak 
for  the  work  of  vivification,  and  knows  nothing  more  than  to 
kill — according  to  this  passage,  "The  letter  killeth,  but  the 
Spirit  giveth  life,"  (2  Cor.  iii,  C,)  and  according  to  this  :  "  for 
if  there  had  been  a  law  given  which  could  have  given  life, 
verily  righteousness  should  have  been  by  the  law."  (Gal. 
iii,  31.) 

But  this  "  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life"  is  said  to  be  "  in  Christ 
Jesus,"  not  because  it  is  only  in  the  person  of  Christ  Jesus, 
but  because  it  can  be  obtained  in  J esus  Christ  alone ;  accord- 
ing to  this  declaration :  "  Believers  receive  the  Spirit,  not  by 
the  works  of  the  law,  but  by  the  hearing  of  faith."  (Gal.  iii, 
2,  5.)  This  phrase,  "  in  Christ,"  is  very  often  used  in  the 
same  manner  in  the  apostolical  writings.  But  that  the  phrase 
is  to  be  received  in  this  sense  also  in  the  present  passage,  is 
manifest, 

(1.)  From  the  scope  or  design  of  the  apostle,  which  is  to 
teach,  that  not  through  the  law,  but  through  the  grace  of 
Christ,  believers  obtain  righteousness  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  by 
whose  power  they  may  be  enabled  to  have  dominion  over  sin, 
and  to  yield  their  members  instruments  of  righteousness  unto 
God. 

(2.)  From  comparing  this  passage  with  the  first  verse.  For, 
"  to  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,"  is  attributed  freedom 
from  condemnation,  because  "  the  vivifying  Spirit  in  Christ 
Jesus  has  made  them  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death." 

(3.)  Because  this  "  vivifying  Spirit"  does  not  "  deliver  from 
the  law  of  sin  and  death,"  except  as  it  is  communicated  "  to 
those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus." 

But  to  this  "Spirit  of  life"  is  attributed  that  "it  makes 


348 


JAMES  AEMINIIJS. 


those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and 
death  ;"  that  is,  from  the  power  and  tyranny  of  sin  reigning, 
and  killing  by  means  of  the  law.  This  deliverance  or  eman- 
cipation is  opposed  to  "  the  ca2)tivity  unto  the  law  of  sm,"  of 
which  mention  is  made  in  Rom.  vii,  23,  and  to  "  the  body  of 
death"  which  is  mentioned  in  verse  the  twenty-fourth.  From 
this  "  law  of  sin,"  and  from  this  "  body  of  death,"  a  man  who 
is  under  the  law  could  be  delivered  neither  through  the  law  of 
Moses,  nor  through  "  the  law  of  the  mind"  which  "  consents 
to  the  law  of  God."  But  from  this  is  also  most  adniii-ably 
proved  the  conclusion  deduced  in  the  first  verse  from  those 
which  preceded  it  [in  the  seventh  chapter].  For  "  delivei-ance 
from  the  law  of  sin  and  death"  is  opposed  to  "  condemnation  ;" 
and,  therefore,  when  the  former  of  those  is  laid  down,  the 
latter  is  removed. 

This  deliverance  is  attributed  "to  those  who  are  in  Christ 
Jesus,"  and  "  who  walk  according  to  the  Spirit,"  from  which  it 
follows,  that  the^'  are  made  free  from  condemnation.  But  the 
reason  why  this  deliverance  is  attributed  to  that  subject,  arises 
from  the  cause  of  deliverance,  that  is,  the  vivifying  Spirit, 
which  Spirit,  as  it  exists  in  Christ  and  is  to  be  obtained  in 
him,  is  likewise  in  "  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus."  Where- 
fore, it  is  not  at  all  wonderful,  that  this  Spirit  exercises  his 
own  proper  force  and  efficacy  in  those  persons  in  whom  he 
dwells ;  and  since  this  force  or  virtue  is  so  peculiar  to  him, 
that  he  has  it  not  in  common  with  the  law  of  Moses,  it  fol- 
lows from  this,  that  those  only  "  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus"  and 
are  partakers  of  his  Spirit,  or  that  those  who,  being  in  Christ 
Jesus,  are  partakers  of  his  Spirit,  are  delivered  from  condem- 
nation, while  those  who  are  under  the  law  remain  under  con- 
demnation, as  being  those  who  are  overcome  by  "  the  law  of 
the  members,"  and  have  been  "  brought  into  captivity  under 
the  law  of  sin,"  no  successful  resistance  being  offered  by  "  the 
law  of  the  mind,"  which  "  consents  to  the  law  of  God." 

We  have  already  said  that,  from  a  comparison  of  this  verse 
with  the  twenty-third  verse  of  the  preceding  chapter,  an  un- 
answerable argument  is  deducible  in  proof — that,  in  the  two 
verses  now  specified,  the  apostle  is  not  treating  about  the  same 


DISSERTATION". 


349 


man ;  but  that,  in  the  twenty-third  verse  of  the  seventh  chap- 
ter, he  treats  about  a  man  who  is  under  the  law,  and  in  this 
second  verse,  about  one  who  is  under  grace  ;  because  the  man 
described  in  the  former  of  these  verses  is  "  hroiight  into  cap- 
tivity under  the  law  of  sin  and  death,"  and  this  by  "  the  law 
of  the  members,"  "  the  law  of  the  mind"  offering  fruitless 
resistance  ;  but  the  man  who  is  mentioned  in  the  second  verse, 
by  the  power  of  the  life-giving  Spirit,  whom  he  has  obtained 
in  Christ  Jesus,  is  made  free  from  the  same  law  of  sin  and 
death." 

4.  Let  us  consider  the  third  verse,  in  which  the  same  thing 
may  appear  still  more  plainly  to  us  ;  for  in  it  the  cause  is  ex- 
plained why  men  who  are  under  the  law,  cannot  be  made  free 
from  the  dominion  and  condemnation  of  sin  ;  but  it  is  shewn 
that  this  is  obtained  for  them  and  effected  by  Christ.  But  the 
cause  is  this,  because  deliverance  from  the  law  of  sin  and 
death,  or  freedom  from  condemnation,  could  not  be  obtained 
except  by  the  condemnation  of  sin,  that  is,  except  sin  had  been 
previously  despoiled  of  the  [assumed]  right  which  it  possessed, 
and  of  its  power  which  it  exercised  over  men  who  were  subject 
to  it.  But  it  possessed  the  right  and  power  of  exercising  do- 
minion and  of  killing.  But  sin  could  not  be  despoiled  of  its 
right,  and  deprived  of  its  power,  by  the  law  ;  for  the  law  was 
rendered  "weak,  through  the  flesh,"  for  the  performance  of 
such  an  arduous  service.  When  God  saw  this  state  of  things, 
and  was  unwilling  the  unhappy  race  of  men  should  be  per- 
petually detained  under  the  tyranny  and  condemnation  of  sin, 
"he  sent  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and 
indeed  for  sin,"  that  is,  for  destroying  it,  and  he  condemned 
sin  in  the  flesh  of  his  Son,  who  bore  sin  in  his  own  body  [on 
the  tree]  and  took  away  from  it  that  authority  over  us  which 
it  possessed,  and  weakened  its  powers. 

From  these  remarks  it  appears  that  this  passage,  which  has 
hitherto  been  accounted  one  of  great  difficulty,  is  plain  and 
perspicuous,  provided  each  part  of  it  be  arranged  aright,  in 
the  following  manner :  "  For  God,  having  sent  his  own  Son 
in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh  and  for  sin,  condemned  sin  in 
the  flesh ;  which  was  a  thing  impossible  to  the  law,  because  it 


350  JAMES  AKvccaus. 

was  weakened  through  the  flesh.-''  For  that  which  the  law 
could  not  do"  is,  "  the  condemnation  of  sin  in  the  flesh." 

Hence  it  is  manifest,  that  this  verse  briefly  explains  the 
whole  cause  why  sia  reigns  unto  death  over  men  who  are 
under  the  law,  and  why  it  possesses  neither  the  authority  nor 
the  power  of  reigning  over  ''those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus" 
and  under  grace.  This  may  he  briefly  shewn  from  a  compari- 
son of  those  things  which  had  been  previously  said,  with  this 
verse.  For  these  words,  what  was  impossible  to  the  law 
because  it  was  weakened  by  the  flesh,"  agi-ee  with  the  follow- 
ing declaration,  contained  in  the  fifth  verse  of  the  preceding 
chapter  :  "  When  we  were  in  the  flesh,  the  motions  of  sins, 
which  are  by  the  law,  did  work  in  our  members ;"  and  with 
these  words  in  the  fourteenth  vei*se,  "We  know  that  the  law 
is  spiritual,  but  I  am  carnal :"  they  also  agree  with  the 
eighteenth  verse,  "  I  know  th.it  in  me,  [that  is,  in  my  flesh,] 
dwelleth  no  good  thing." 

But  these  words,  "  God.  in  the  flesh  of  his  Son,  condemned 
sin,"  agree  with  what  said  in  the  sixth  verse,  of  the  prece- 
ding chapter  :  "  But  now  we  are  delivered  from  the  law,  that 
being  dead  wherein  we  were  held ;"  that  is,  sin  being  condemned 
which  held  us  bound  and  in  subjection  to  it.  But,  in  this  pas- 
sage, the  cause  is  more  fully  explained,  that  in  the  flesh  of 
Christ  such  condemnation  was  efiected. 

5.  From  these  observations  is  deduced  the  meaning  of  the 
fourth  verse,  plainly  agreeing  with  those  which  preceded.  It 
is  this,  after  it  had  come  to  pass,  tliat  sin  was  condenmed  in 
the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  God,  the  right  or  authority  of  the  law 
was  completed  and  consummated  in  those  who  are  in  Christ 
Je.-n-,  and  who  walk  after  the  Spirit;  so  that  they  are  no 
longer  under  the  guidance  and  government  of  the  law,  but 
under  the  guidance  of  Him  who  has  delivered  us  from  sin,  and 
who  has  claimed  us  for  his  own  people. 

This  is  plainly  expressed  by  the  apostle,  in  the  fourth  verse 
of  the  preceding  chapter,  in  these  words  :  "  Ye  also  are  be- 
come dead  to  the  law  in  the  body  of  Christ,  that  ye  should  be 
married  to  another,  even  to  Him  who  is  raised  from  the  dead, 
that  we  should  bring  forth  fruit  unto  God."    For  these  phrases 


DISSERTATION. 


351 


agree  with  each  other :  "Ye  are  become  dead  to  the  law," 
and,  "  the  right  or  authority  of  the  law  is  fulfilled  or  comple- 
ted in  you."  And,  "  in  the  body  of  Christ  ye  are  become 
dead  to  the  law,"  is  the  same  as,  "  siu  was  condemned  in  the 
flesh  of  Christ,  that  the  right  or  authority  of  the  law  might 
be  fulfilled  in  us."  But  when  the  right  of  the  law  is  comple- 
ted and  consummated  by  the  condemnation  of  sin  which  was 
effected  in  the  flesh  of  Christ,  we  belong  or  are  married  to 
another,  that  is,  the  right  is  transferred  from  the  law  to  Christ, 
that  we  may  be  no  longer  under  the  law,  but  under  Christ, 
and  may  live  under  grace  and  the  guidance  of  his  Spirit. 

For  these  words,  "  that  the  right  or  authority  of  the  law 
might  or  may  be  fulfilled  in  us,"  must  not  be  understood  as  if, 
when  sin  had  been  condemned  in  the  flesh  of  Christ,  the  right 
or  authority  of  the  law  was  still  to  be  completed  ;  but  that 
after  the  condemnation  of  sin  in  the  flesh  of  Christ,  the  right 
of  the  law  was  actually  fulfilled.  Several  forms  of  speech, 
similar  to  this,  are  used  in  this  manner  in  the  Scriptures.  For 
instance:  "All  this  was  done,  that  it  miii,htbe  fulfilled  which 
was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet :  (Matt,  i,  22  :)  "He 
came  and  dwelt  in  a  city  called  Nazareth^  that  it  ujight  be 
fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophets.  He  shall  he  called 
a  IN'azarene."  (ii,  23.)  "  He  came  and  dwelt  in  Capernaum, 
which  is  upon  the  sea  coast,  in  the  borders  of  Zabiilon  and 
Nephthalim,  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by 
Esaias  the  prophet,  sayinsr.  The  land  of  Zabulon^  and  the 
land  of  Nepthalim^  &c.,  light  is  sprung  iip  to  them  mho  sat 
in  the  region  and  shadow  of  deathP  (iv,  13-16.)  "  He  cast 
out  the  spirits  with  his  word,  and  healed  all  that  were  sick, 
that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the 
prophet,  saying.  Himself  tooh  our  infirmities ^'''^  &c.  (viii,  16, 
17.)  See  also  Matthew  xii,  17 ;  xiii,  35  ;  xxvi,  56.  In  all 
these  examples,  the  phrase,  "that  it  might  be  fulfilled,"  evi- 
dently means  that  the  prediction  was  actually  fulfilled  hj  those 
acts  which  are  mentioned  in  the  several  passages.  This  is 
also  signified  by  a  phrase  different  from  the  preceding,  in 
Matthew  xxvii,  9,  "  Then  was  fulfilled  that  which  was  spoken 
bj  Jeremy  the  prophet."    It  is  lawful  also  to  change  the 


352 


JAMES  AUMTNIUS. 


mode  of  speech  in  this  verse,  (Rom.  viii,  4.)  into  another 
{co?isimile]  exactly  of  the  same  import :  Then  was  fulfilled 
the  right  or  authority  of  the  law  in  us."  In  addition  to  these, 
consult  Matthew  xxvii,  35;  Luke  xxi,  22;  John  xiii,  18; 
xvii,  12 ;  xviii,  9  ;  and  innumerable  other  passages. 

From  this  explication  it  is  apparent,  that  this  portion  of 
holy  writ,  (Rom.  viii,  1-4,)  is  plain  and  perspicuous,  though, 
without  this  interpretation,  it  is  encompassed  with  much  ob- 
scurity, as  almost  all  interpreters  have  confessed,  while  thej 
have  labored  hard  to  explain  it. 

We  will  now,  by  permission,  compress  all  these  remarks 
into  a  small  compass,  and  briefly  recapitulate  them  ;  what  I 
have  advanced  will  then  become  far  more  evident.  Let  us  do 
this  in  the  following  manner : 

"  Since,  therefore,  we  have  already  seen,  that  men  under 
the  law  are  held  captive  under  the  dominion  and  tyranny  of 
sin,  we  may  easily  conclude  from  this,  that  those  only  who 
are  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  who  walk  after  the  Spirit  and  not 
after  the  flesh,  are  free  from  all  condemnation  ;  because  the 
law,  the  right,  the  power,  the  force  or  virtue  of  the  vivifying 
Spirit,  which  is  and  can  be  obtained  in  Jesus  Christ  alone, 
has  liberated  [tales]  persons  of  this  description  from  the  law, 
the  power  and  the  force  of  sin  and  death,  from  the  empire  and 
dominion  of  sin,  and  of  its  condemnation.  Christ  Jesus  could 
lawfully  do  this  by  his  Spirit,  as  being  the  person  in  whose 
flesh  sin  was  condemned,  that  it  has  no  longer  any  right, 
neither  can  have  any,  over  those  who  are  Christ's ;  in  which 
flesh,  indeed.  He  was  sent  by  his  Father,  because  this  very 
thing  was  impossible  to  the  law,  weakened  as  it  was  through 
the  flesh.  And  thus  it  has  come  to  pass,  that  the  right  of  the 
law,  which  it  had  over  us  when  we  were  still  under  the  law,  is 
completed  or  fulfilled  in  persons  of  this  description,  who  have 
becooie  Christ's  people  through  faith,  that  they  might  here- 
after live,  be  influenced,  and  governed  by  his  grace  and  ac- 
cording to  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  From  these 
things  we  may  certainly  conclude  that  sin  cannot  have  do- 
minion over  them,  and  therefore,  that  they  are  able  to  yield 
their  members  instruments  of  righteousness  to  God,  as  those 


DISSERTATION. 


353 


who  have  been  translated  from  the  death  of  sin  to  the  life 
of  the  Spirit." 

But  these  topics  the  apostle  pursues  as  far  as  the  sixteenth 
verse  of  this  eighth  chapter,  in  a  manner  accommodated  to 
the  same  scope  or  design  as  we  have  hitherto  pointed  out ; 
and  he  seems  always  mindful  of  the  exhortation  which  he  had 
given  in  Romans  vi,  12,  13 ;  from  the  conjoint  reason  in 
which  he  descends  into  the  succeedino;  lons^  investiojation. 

These  observations,  however,  may  suffice,  lest  we  be  too 
operose  in  demonstrating  a  matter  that  is  so  plain  and  per- 
spicuous. 


SECOKJ)  PAET. 

I.     THE  OPINION  WHICH  IS  TO  BE    COREOBOKATED    BY  TES- 
TIMONIES. 

This  opinion^  which  explains  Romans  vii,  as  relating  7iof  to 
a  man  tender  grace^  hut  to  one  who  is  placed  under  the  law^ 
and  to  one  who  is  not  yet  regenerated  hy  the  Spirit  of  Christy 
was  never  yet  condemned  in  the  church  of  Christy  as  hereti- 
cal^ hut  has  always  had  some  defenders  among  the  doctors 
of  the  church. 

We  will  now  approach  to  the  second  part  of  our  proposi- 
tion, which  we  have  judged  it  right  to  treat  for  the  purpose  of 
making  it  evident  to  all  men,  that  the  opinion  which  I  defend 
is  not  of  recent  growth,  neither  has  it  been  fabricated  by  my 
brain,  nor  borrowed  from  some  heretic,  but  that  it  is  very  an- 
cient, and  approved  by  a  great  part  of  the  doctors  of  the  prim- 
itive church,  and  that,  besides,  it  has  never  been  so  far  reject- 
ed, by  those  who  have  given  a  different  interpretation  to  the 
passage,  as  to  induce  them  to  judge  it  worthy  of  being  brand- 
ed with  the  black  mark  of  heresy. 


354 


JAMES  AEMmiUS. 


n.  ^THE  MOST  ANCIENT  AND  MOST  EESPECTABLE  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN 

FATHERS  APPROVE  OF  THE  INTERPRETATION  WHICH  WE  GIVE  TO 
THIS  CHAPTER. 

1.  IrencRus.  2.  Tertullian.  3.  Origen.  4.  Cyprian.  5. 
Ckrysostom.  6.  Basil  the  Great.  7.  Theodoret.  8.  Cy- 
ril. 9.  Ifacarius  the  Egyptian.  10.  Damascenus.  11. 
Theoj^Uylact.    12.  Amhrose.    13.  Jerome. 

1.  IREN^US. 

IreiJSQus  thus  cites  part  of  this  chapter  in  lib.  3,  cap.  20 : 
"  Oil  this  account,  therefore,  he,  who  through  the  virgin  is 
Emmauuel,  God  with  us.^  the  Lord  himself,  is  the  sign  of  our 
salvation  ;  because  he  was  the  Lord  who  saved  them,  as 
through  themselves  \]ion  habebant  salvari]  they  possessed  not 
the  means  of  being  saved.  On  account  of  this  also,  wben  St. 
Paul  is  shewing  tlie  weakness  of  man,  he  says,  Iknow  that  in 
me,  (that  is,  in  my  fleshy  dwelleth  no  good  thing,  thus  intima- 
ting that  the  blessing  of  salvation  is  not  from  us,  but  from 
God.  And  again,  0  wretched  man  that  1  ami  %oho  thallde^ 
liver  me  from  the  body  of  this  death?  He  then  infers  a  de^ 
liverer,  the  grace       /  sus  Christ  our  Lord^'' 

In  this  quotation,  [when  referring  to  St.  Paul's  declaration,] 
he  does  not  say,  "a  regenerate  man,"  "a  believer,"  or  "a* 
Christian,"  but  simply  man^''  under  which  appellation, 
neither  the  Scriptures  nor  the  fathers  are  accustomed  to 
speak  of  one  who  is  a  Christian,  a  believer,  and  a  regenerate 
man. 

2.  TERTULLIAN. 

For  though  he  denied  that  in  his  flesh  dwelt  any  good  thing, 
\sed^^  yet  it  was  according  to  the  law  qf  the  letter  in  which  he 
was;  but  according  to  the  law  of  the  Sp>irit,  witli  which  he 
connects  us,  he  delivers  from  the  weakness  of  the  flesli.  He 
eays,  "  For  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  hath  manumitted  thee 


DISSEKTATION.'V;.' 

from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."  For  though  lie  seems  to  dis- 
pute on  the  part  of  Judaism,  yet  he  directs  to  us  the  integrity 
and  plenitude  [disGipUnaruni]  of  instructions,  on  account  of 
whom,  as  hiboring  in  the  law  through  the  flesh,  God  sent  his 
own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin,  condemn- 
ed sin  in  the  flesh.''    {On  Climtity^  cap.  17.) 

In  this  sentence,  TertuUian  openly  affirms,  that  the  passage 
must  be  explained  concerning  "  a  man  who  is  under  the  law 
of  the  letter."  ]^or  is  it  a  very  great  objection  if  any  one  as- 
sert, that  this  book  was  w^ritten  by  him  while  he  was  in  a  her- 
esy ;  for  on  this  point  he  was  not  heretical,  and  the  opinion, 
it  is  apparent,  had  then  obtained,  that  this  chapter  w^as  to  be 
understood  in  this  manner. 

3.  OEIGEN. 

But  with  respect  to  what  he  says,  "  but  I  am  carnal,  sold 
under  sin,"*  on  this  occasion,  as  a  teacher  of  the  church,  he 
takes  upon  himself  the  personation  of  the  weak,  on  which  ac- 
count he  has  also  said  in  another  passage,  to  the  weak  be- 
came I  also  as  weak."  Therefore,  in  this  passage  St.  Paul  is 
made  "  a  carnal  man  and  sold  under  sin,"  to  those  who  are 
the  weak,  (that  is,  to  the  carnal,)  and  who  are  sold  under  sin, 
and  he  speaks  those  things  which  it  is  their  practice  to  utter 
under  the  pretext  either  of  excuse  or  of  accusation.  Speaking, 
therefore,  as  in  their  person,  he  says,  "  but  I  am  carnal,  sold 
under  sin,"  that  is,  living  according  to  the  flesh,  and  reduced, 
[as  a  servant,]  by  purchase,  to  the  power  of  sin,  lust  and  con- 
cupiscence ;  "  for  that  whic  I  do,  I  allow  not,"  &c. 

And  he  (that  is,  Paul  the  carnal  man^  here  says,  "  now 
then  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwxdleth  in  me.'^ 
But  in  other  passages  Paul  the  spiritual  inan  says,  "I  labor- 
ed more  abundantly  than  they  all,  yet  not  I,  but  the  grace  of 
God  which  was  wdth  me."  Therefore,  as  he  thus  ascribes  his 
labors,  not  to  himself,  but  to  the  grace  of  God  which' worked 
in  him  ;  so  does  that  carnal  man  attribute  the  evil  works,  not 
to  himself,  but  to  sin  that  dwelleth  and  worketh  in  him.  On 

* 


356 


JAMES  ABMTNTUS. 


this  account  he  says,  "now  then  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but 
sin  that  dwelleth  in  me  ;  for  in  me,  (that  is,  in  my  flesh,) 
dwelleth  no  good  thing."  For  Christ  does  not  yet  dwell  in 
him,  neither  in  his  body  yet  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
^Nevertheless,  this  man  whose  character  is  personated  is  not 
in  every  repect  averse  from  good  things,  but  in  purpose  and 
in  will  he  begins  to  seek  after  good  things.  But  he  can- 
not  yet  obtain  such  things  [in  rebus]  in  reality  and  in  works. 
For  there  is  a  certain  inlirmity  of  this  kind  in  those  who 
receive  the  beginnings  of  conversion^  that  when  they  truly 
will  instantly  to  do  every  thing  that  is  good,  the  effect  does 
not  immediately  follow  the  will.    {On  Romans  vii.) 

4.  CYPRIAN. 

"When  treating  upon  the  contest  between  the  flesh  and  the 
Spirit,  in  his  sixth  Discourse  On  the  LorcTs  Prayer^  as  well 
as  in  his  pamphlet  On  the  Celibacy  of  the  Clergy^  Cyprian 
does  not  cite  Komans  vii,  but  he  quotes  Galatians  v,  17,  "Thft 
flesh  lusteth  against  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against  the  flesh," 
&c.  But  that  he  understood  Romans  vii,  to  relate  not  only 
to  the  indwelling  of  sin,  but  also  to  its  dominion,  is  evident 
from  his  Prologue  concerning  the  Cardinal  Works  of  Christy 
in  which,  among  other  remarks,  the  following  occurs — If  I 
do  not  know  who  it  is  that  inscribed  this  law  in  my  members 
that  it  may,  with  such  violent  domination,  oppress  the  Spirit, 
and  that  the  better  and  more  worthy  nature  may  succumb  to 
the  worse,  I  must  patiently  endure  it  if  I  do  not  understand 
the  Almighty  Operator  of  the  universe." 

He  adds,  in  a  subsequent  passage  of  the  same  prologue : 
It  is  difficult  to  understand  wherefore  this  law  of  sin,  in  this 
and  in  similar  individuals,  oppresses  the  law  of  righteousness, 
and  wherefore  weak  and  enervated  reason  so  miserably  falls, 
when  it  is  able  to  stand  ;  especially  when  this  defect  depends 
on  the  sentence  of  damnation,  and  the  ancient  transgression 
has  obtained  this  inevitable  punishment." 


DISSERTATIOISr. 


357 


5.  CHRYSOSTOM. 

When  treating  professedly  on  this  portion  of  holy  writ  and 
explaining  it,  in  Comment  on  RomaiisYii^  Chrysostom,  after 
confirming  what  he  had  advanced  in  the  preceding  verses, 
expresses  himself  in  the  following  manner  ; 

Therefore,  Paul  subjoined  this  assertion,  "  but  I  am  carnal, 
sold  under  sin."    Thus  describing  a  man  who  lives  tinder  the 
law  and  hefore  it.    Therefore,  sin  itself  is  adverse  to  the  law 
of  nature.    For  this  is  what  he  says,  "  Warring  against  the 
law  of  my  mind."    It  also  imposes  on  the  law  of  nature  a 
universal  contest  and  warfare,  when  it  afterwards  draws  up  in 
battle  array  the  forces  of  sin.    For  the  Mosaic  law  was  lastly 
added  \_ex  abundanti]  beyond  what  was  necessary.  But, 
though  the  former  law  teaches  indeed  those  things  which  ought 
to  be  done,  and  though  the  latter  unites  in  extolling  them ; 
yet  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  has  performed  any  execution 
in  this  battle  against  sin.    So  great  is  the  tyranny  of  sin,  so 
wonderfully  prevailing  and  overcoming  !    This  is  likewise  in- 
timated by  St.  Paul,  when,  after  announcing  the  conflict  of 
opposing  and  predominant  sin,  he  says  :  "  But  I  see  another 
law  in  my  members,  warring  against  the  law  of  my  mind,  and 
bringing  me  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin."    For  he  does 
not  simply  say,     conquering  me,"  but  "  rendering  me  a  cap- 
tive to  the  law  of  sin."    Neither  does  he  say,  "  bringing  me 
into  captivity  to  the  impulse  of  the  flesh  or  of  carnal  nature," 
but  "  bringing  me  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin,"  that  is,  to 
the  tyranny  and  power  of  sin. 

0  wretched  man  that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver  me  from 
the  hody  of  this  d.eath  Do  you  here  behold  how  amazingly 
great  is  the  tyranny  of  wickedness,  and  how  it  also  overcomes 
the  mind  which  "  finds  a  condelectation,  or  joint  delight,  in 
the  law  of  God  ?"  For  he  says,  "  It  is  not  that  any  one  says 
I  hate  the  law  of  God  "  or  am  averse  to  it,  and  am  brought 
into  captivity  to  sin.  For  "  I  find  a  condelectation  in  the  law, 
I  consent  to  it,  and  flee  to  it."  Yet  it  was  not  able  to  save 
him  when  he  fled  to  it.    But  Christ  has  saved  him,  when  he 


358 


JAMES  AEMmms. 


was  fleeing  from  it.  Here  you  acknowledge  the  great  excel- 
lence of  grace. 

And  in  bis  Commentary  on  Romans  viii,  2,  he  says : 
After  sin  has  been  destroyed,  this  difficult  warfare  is  termi- 
nated by  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  tbrongli  which  the  con- 
test is  now  become  easy  to  us.  For  this  grace  first  crowns  ua 
[as  victors],  and  then  leads  us  forth  to  battle  honorably  atten- 
ded by  numerous  auxilary  forces. 

6.    BASIL  THE  GREAT. 

But  we  will  now  adduce  what  he  has  said  in  another  pas- 
sage, when  delivering  the  same  doctrine,  in  a  manner  far  more 
objurgatory  :  "  For  we  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual ;  but  I 
am  carnal,  sold  under  sin.  For  that  which  I  do  I  allow  not,'' 
&c.  And,  prosecuting  this  speculation  in  more  particulars, 
that  it  is  impossible  for  him  who  is  held  captive  hy  sin  to 
serve  the  Lord,,  he  manifestly  points  out  to  us  our  Deliverer 
from  this  tyranny,  while  he  says,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I  am  1 
who  shall  deliver  me  from  this  body  of  death  ?  I  give  thanks 
to  God  tlirough  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,"  &c.  {On  Bajptism,^ 
lib.  l.fol.  4:09.) 

It  is,  therefore,  quite  necessary,  both  from  the  things  al- 
ready related,  and  from  others  of  a  similar  kind,  (if  we  have 
not  received  the  blessing  of  God  in  vain,)  that  we  be  fir&t  de- 
livered from  \dominio']  the  power  of  the  devil,  xoho  leads  the 
mail  that  is  detained  in  captivity  hy  sin  to  [the  commission 
of]  those  evils  which  he  would  not.^  and  then,  having  denied 
all  things  present,  and  our  own  self,  and  having  left  all  kin- 
dred feeling  for  this  life,  that  we  become  the  Lord's  disciples, 
as  he  hath  himself  said,  "  If  any  man  will  come  to  me,  let  him 
deny  himself,"  &c.  {Ihid.) 

This  is  what  he  who  is  unwillingly  drawn  by  sin  ought  to 
know,  that  he  is  governed  by  another  sin  pre-existing  in  him- 
self, which  while  he  [uLtro^  willingly  serves,  with  regard  to 
other  things  he  is  led  by  it  even  to  those  which  he  does  not 
will.    As  it  is  said  in  Komans  vii,  "  For  we  know  that  the  law 


DISSERTATION. 


359 


is  spiritual ;  but  I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin,"  &c.,  quoted  as 
far  as  the  seventeenth  verse,  "  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me. 
{Summary  of  Morals^  tSum.  23,  caj?.  1^  foL  477.) 

The  spirit  or  mind,  which  [patittcr]  is  the  patient  bearer  of 
the  dominion  of  the  affections  or  inclinations,  is  not  permitted 
bj  them  to  be  free  to  [do]  those  things  which  it  wills,  accord- 
ing to  the  speculation  of  the  apostle  already  related,  who  said, 
"  but  I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin.  For  what  I  would,  that  do 
I  not ;  but  what  I  hate,  that  do  I."  {Compendium  of  Ques- 
tions explained^  Qmst.  16,  fol.  563.) 

"  jN"ow  then  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth 
in  me,"  God  himself  permitting  even  this  to  befall  us  for  our 
good,  if  by  any  means  the  mind,  through  those  things 
which  it  reluctantly  suffers,  may  be  brought  to  understand  that 
which  has  the  dominion  over  it ;  and  if,  knowing  itself,  that 
it  unwillingly  serves  sin,  it  recover  from  the  snare  of  the  devil, 
and  seek  for  the  mercy  of  God  which  is  prepared  to  receive 
those  who  are  legitimately  penitent.  {Ibid.) 

7.  THEODORET. 

l^ui  I  am  carnal.^  He  introduces  a  man  before  [he  has 
obtained]  grace,  who  is  beset  with  motions  and  perturbations 
of  mind.  For  he  denominates  that  man  carnal  who  has  not 
yet  obtained  spiritual  grace.    {On  Romans  vii.) 

For  what  I  would ^  that  do  I  not ;  hut  what  I  hate^  that 
do  /.]  The  law  beautifully  effects  one  thing,  that  is,  it  teach- 
es what  is  evil,  and  induces  a  hatred  of  it  on  the  mind.  But 
these  words,  "  I  would  not,"  and  "  I  hare,"  signify  weakness, 
and  not  necessity.  For  w^e  do  not  sin,  as  being  impelled  by 
necessity  or  by  some  force ;  but,  being  enticed  by  pleasure, 
we  do  those  things  which  we  abhor  as  wicked  and  flagitious 
deeds.  {Ihid.) 

I  delight  in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man^ 
He  has  called  the  mind    the  inward  man."  {Hid.) 

But  I  see  another  law  in  my  members^  warring^  &c.]  He 
bestows  on  sin  the  appellation  of  "  the  law  of  sin."  It  exerts 
its  operation  when  the  corporeal  perturbations  of  the  mind 


360 


JAMES  AEMTimjS. 


[exiliunt]  are  in  lively  motion  ;  but,  on  account  of  that  su- 
pineness  with  which  the  mind  has  invested  itself  from  the  be- 
ginning, it  is  unable  to  restrain  them.  Though  the  mind  has 
cast  aw^ay  its  own  liberty,  yet  it  has  patience  enough  to  serve 
them.  But  though  the  mind  thus  serves  them,  yet  it  hates 
servitude;  and  commends  him  who  brings  an  accusation 
against  servitude.  After  the  apostle  had  discoursed  on  all 
these  topics,  that  he  might  show  what  sort  of  people  we  were 
before  grace,  and  our  condition  after  grace,  and  having  taken 
on  himself  the  personation  of  those  who,  before  grace,  had 
been  besieged  and  encompassed  by  sin  ;  therefore,  as  though 
he  was  completely  surrounded  by  a  mass  of  enemies,  and  led 
away  into  captivity  and  compelled  to  become  a  slave,  and  see- 
ing no  aid  from  any  other  quarter,  he  grievously  groans  and 
laments ;  he  shews  that  help  could  not  be  afforded  by  the  law, 
and  he  cries  out,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I  am  !"  {Hid.) 

There  is  tlierefore  now  no  condemnation.^  etc.]  For  the 
perturbations  of  our  mind  do  not  overcome  us  who  are  now 
unwilling,  because  we  have  accepted  the  grace  of  the  divine 
Spirit.    {On  Romans  viii) 

For  the  law  of  the  Sjnrit  of  life  m  ChiiM  Jesus,  &c.] 
As  he  called  sin  "  the  law  of  sin,"  so  does  he  call  the  vivify- 
ing Spirit  "  the  law  of  the  Spirit."  He  says,  that  the  grace  of 
this  Spirit,  through  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  has  endowed  thee 
with  a  two-fold  liberty ;  for  it  has  not  only  broken  the  power 
of  sin,  but  it  has  also  destroyed  the  tyranny  of  death.  (Ibid.) 

8.  CYEIL. 

For  what  the  law  coidd  not  do,  in  that  it  icas  weak 
through  the  flesh,  &c.]  Therefore,  when  the  only  Begotten 
became  man  for  us,  the  law  of  sin  was  indeed  abolished  in  the 
flesh ;  and  our  affairs  were  brought  back  again  that  they  may 
return  to  their  first  origin.  For  death,  corruption,  pleasui^es 
and  other  lusts  prevailed,  which,  having  corruption  as  their 
assistant,  committed  depredations  on  the  weak  and  infirm  mind. 
{Against  Jidian,  lib.  3,  fol.  184.) 

So  then  with  the  mind  I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God^ 


DISSEKTATION.  361 

hut  with  the  flesh,  the  law  of  sin.  There  is,  therefore,  now 
no  condemnation  to  them  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  &c., 
quoting  the  whole  passage  down  to  the  fifth  verse.]  For  the 
flesh  and  the  spirit  manifestly  fight  the  one  against  the  other  ; 
that  is,  carnal  prudence  and  the  motions  [insitarum]  of  innate 
lusts  war  against  [virtus']  the  power  of  life  according  to  the 
Spirit.  Though  the  divine  law  urges  us  that  we  ought  to 
choose  the  good,  yet  [concupiscentia]  the  desire  of  the  flesh  is 
borne  towards  that  which  is  contrary.  But  now  that  is  loos- 
ened which  hindered,  and  the  law  of  sin  is  weakened  ;  but  the 
law  of  the  Spirit  has  prevailed.  On  what  account ?  "For 
God  hath  sent  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  the  flesh  of  sin, 
that  he  might  condemn  sin  in  the  flesh."  'Now,  in  what  man- 
ner was  not  the  incarnation  of  the  Wokd  exceedingly  useful  ? 
For  even  "  our  sin  is  here  condemned  in  the  flesh."  But  if 
the  Wokd  had  not  been  made  flesh,  our  affairs  would  have  re- 
mained without  any  amendment,  and  we  should  now  be  serv- 
ing in  the  flesh  the  law  of  sin,  no  one  laving  abolished  it 
within  us.  {On  the  True  Faith,  to  the  Q,ueens,  lib.  1,  fol. 
283.) 

We  confess,  therefore,  that,  by  Adam's  personal  transgres- 
sion of  the  law,  the  human  substance  has  been  corrupted  ;  and 
that,  by  the  pleasures  of  the  flesh,  and  those  motions  which 
are  so  pleasing  to  our  nature,  our  understanding  is  oppressed 
as  by  the  domination  of  a  tyrant.  Wherefore  it  was  necessary 
for  our  salvation,  who  are  sojourners  on  earth,  that  the  Woed 
OF  God  should  become  man,  and  [faceret  jpropriam]  he 
should  take  human  flesh  upon  himself  as  his  own,  given  up 
though  it  was  to  corruption,  and  sickly  through  the  allure- 
ments of  pleasure  ;  and  that,  as  he  is  the  life  of  all,  he  should 
indeed  destroy  its  corruption,  but  i-estrain  its  innate  motions, 
that  is,  those  which  [prcecipitabant]  impelled  us  headlong  to 
vices  and  pleasures  ;  for  in  this  manner  it  was  necessary  that 
offences  should  be  mortified  in  our  flesh.  But  we  recollect 
that  the  blessed  Paul  denominates  the  voluptuous  motions 
which  are  planted  within  us,  "  the  law  of  sin."  Where- 
fore, because  human  flesh  became  [propria]  a  property  of  the 
Word,  it  has  now  ceased  to  yield  to  corruption.  And 

23  YOL.  II. 


362 


JAMES  AKMmiUS. 


because  he  knew  no  sin,  as  God  who  united  him  to  himself, 
and,  as  I  have  ah-eady  said,  who  made  [human  nature]  a  prop- 
erty [of  the  Word],  it  has  now  ceased  to  be  sick  with  vices 
and  pleasures.  E"either  did  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God  per- 
form this  for  himself,  (for  he  is  the  Word  which  always  exists,) 
but  he  undoubtedly  did  it  for  us.  For  if  we  are  alike  [suh- 
jecti]  brought  into  captivity  through  Adam's  transgression  of 
the  law,  therefore  the  blessings  which  are  in  Christ  will  de- 
scend upon  us,  and  which  are  incorruption  and  the  destruction 
of  sins.    {First  Epistle  to  Successus.) 

9.    MACAEIUS  THE  EGYPTIAN. 

Adam  having  transgressed  the  command  of  God,  and  hav- 
ing obeyed  the  impious  serpent,  sold  himself  to  the  devil ; 
and  thus  wickedness  invested  his  mind,  that  excellent  crea- 
ture, which  God  had  formed  after  his  own  image,  as  the  apos- 
tle likewise  says  :  "  Having  spoiled  principalities  and  pow- 
ers, and  triumphed  over  them  in  his  cross."  For  the  Lord 
came  on  this  account,  that  he  might  expel  them,  [the  princi- 
palities and  powers,]  and  might  receive  his  own  house  and  his 
proper  temple,  which  is  man.  The  mind,  therefore,  is  called 
"  the  body  of  darkness  and.  of  wickedness,"  so  long  as  it  has 
within  itself  the  darkness  of  sin  ;  because  it  lives  there  in  a 
wicked  world  of  darkness,  and  is  there  detained  captive.  As 
Paul  likewise,  when  giving  it  the  appellation  of  the  body 
of  sin  and  death,"  says  "  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroy- 
ed." And  again,  "  Who  shall  deliver  me  from  the  body  of 
this  death  ?"  On  the  contrary,  the  mind  that  has  believed  in 
God,  is  both  delivered  from  the  mortified  sin  of  a  life  of  dark- 
ness, and  has  received  the  light  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  its  life ; 
living  in  which,  from  that  time  it  perseveres ;  because  it  is 
there  governed  by  the  light  divine.    {Homily  1.) 

From  this,  it  is  evident,  that  Macarius  understood  this  pas- 
sage, as  referring  to  a  man  who  was  subjected  to  the  spirit  of 
darkness,  the  slave  of  sin,  and  the  captive  of  Satan,  and  who, 
not  being  yet  dead  to  sin,  has  not  received  the  light  of  the 


DISSERTATIOU-. 


363 


Holy  Spirit,  that  is,  who  is  not  yet  regenerated  by  the  Spirit 
of  Christ. 

10.  DAMASCENUS. 

In  the  fourth  book  of  his  Orthodox  Faith^  (cap.  23,)  he 
explains  this  matter  very  satisfactorily ;  wherefore,  it  will  not 
be  considered  irksome,  if  at  greater  length  we  transcribe  his 
opinion  in  his  own  words,  as  they  have  been  rendered  by  his 
Latin  translator : 

The  law  of  God,  when  coming  to  our  mind,  attracts  it  to 
itself,  and  stimulates  our  consciences.  But  our  conscience  is 
also  called  "  the  Law  of  our  mind."  But  the  suggestion  [ma- 
ligni\  of  the  devil,  that  is,  the  law  of  sin,  when  co-iing  to  the 
members  of  the  flesh,  also  immits  itself,  through  the  flesh,  to 
us.  For,  after  we  have  once  voluntarily  transgressed  the  law 
of  God,  and  have  admitted  the  suggestion  of  the  devil,  we 
have  granted  entrance  to  him,  being  brought  into  captivity  by 
our  own  selves  to  sin  :  Whence  our  body  is  promptly  led  on  to 
commit  sin.  Therefore,  the  odor  and  feeling  of  sin  is  said  to 
be  inherent  to  our  body,  that  is,  the  lust  and  pleasure  of  the 
body,  "  the  lav/  in  the  members  of  our  flesh."  Therefore, 
"  the  law  of  the  mind,"  that  is,  the  conscience,  feels  a  sort  of 
condelectation  in  the  law  of  God,  that  is,  in  the  commandment 
which  it  really  wills.  But  "  the  law  of  sin,"  that  is,  the  sug- 
gestion through  the  law  which  is  in  the  members,  that  is,  the 
concupiscence,  the  inclination  and  motion  of  the  body,  by 
means  of  the  irrational  part  of  the  soul  also  wars  against  the 
law  of  my  mind,"  that  is,  my  conscience,  and  brings  me,  con- 
senting to  the  law  of  God  and  not  fulfilling  it,  yet  not  desiring 
sin,  into  captivity,  according  to  contradiction  through  the  en- 
ticement of  pleasure  and  the  lust  of  the  body,  and  the  brute 
part  of  the  soul  which  is  devoid  of  reason — as  I  have  before 
said,  it  causes  me  to  err,  and  persuades  me  to  serve  sin.  "  But 
what  was  impossible  to  the  law,  in  that  the  law  was  rendered 
weak  through  the  flesh,  God,  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  like, 
ness  of  the  flesh  of  sin,"  (for  he  assumed  fleshy  but  by  no 


364 


JAMES  ABMTCnUS. 


means  sin^)  "  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh,  that  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  law  might  be  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk  not  after 
the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit."  For  "  the  Spirit  strives  with 
our  infirmity,"  and  afibrds  strength  to  "  the  law  of  the  mind" 
in  our  souls,  against  "  the  law  which  is  in  our  members." 

11.  THEOPHYLACT. 

He  says,  "I  am  carnal,"  that  is,  human  nature  universally 
— ^both  that  part  of  it  in  existence  before  the  enactment  of  the 
law,  and  that  at  the  time  of  the  giving  of  the  law — had  a  nu- 
merous multitude  [affectus]  of  passions  associated  with  it. — 
For  we  not  only  became  mortal  through  Adam's  transgression 
of  the  law,  but  human  nature,  being  sold  under  sin,"  receives 
likewise  [pravos  affectus]  corrupt  inclinations,  being  evident- 
ly subjected  to  the  authority  and  domination  of  sin,  so  that  it 
cannot  raise  its  head.    {On  Bomans  vii.) 

This  weakness,  therefore,  the  law  could  not  cure,  though  it 
dictated  what  ought  to  be  done,  but  when  Christ  came,  he 
healed  it.  This  then  is  the  scope  or  design  of  those  things 
which  the  apostle  has  said,  or  will  yet  say — to  shew  that  hu- 
man nature  has  endured  those  things  which  are  immedicable, 
and  that  it  cannot  be  restored  to  soundness  by  any  other  than 
by  Christ,  and  by  him  alone.  {Ibid.) 

0  wretched  man  that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver  me  from  the 
body  of  this  death  f]  The  law  of  nature  was  not  able,  the 
written  law  could  not ;  but  the  tyranny  of  sin  conquered  both 
of  them.  "Whence,  therefore,  is  the  hope  of  salvation?  &c. 
{Ibid) 

1  yield  thanhs  to  God  through  Jesus  Christ. 1  For  he  has 
performed  those  things  which  the  law  was  unable  to  do.  For 
he  has  delivered  me  from  weakness  of  body,  inspiring  into  it 
strength  and  consolation,  that  it  may  no  longer  be  oppressed 
by  the  tyranny  of  sin. 


DISSERTATION. 


365 


12.  AMBROSE. 

Whether  St.  Ambrose,  or  some  other  person,  was  the  author 
or  the  interpolator  of  those  Commentaries  on  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans^  which  generally  pass  under  his  name,  the  following 
are  some  of  his  remarks  on  the  seventh  chapter  : 

That  he  is  sold  under  sin^  is  that  he  derives  his  origin  from 
Adam,  who  first  sinned,  and  by  his  own  transgression  rendered 
himself  subject  to  sin,  as  Isaiah  says,  "  For  your  iniquities  have 
ye  sold  yourselves."  (1,  1.)  For  Adam  first  sold  himself ;  and 
by  this  act,  all  his  seed  was  subjected  to  sin.  Wherefore  man 
is  too  full  of  weakness  to  observe  the  precepts  of  the  law,  un- 
less he  be  strengthened  by  divine  aids.  Hence  arises  that 
which  he  says,  "  The  law  is  spiritual,  but  I  am  carnal,"  &c. ; 
that  is,  the  law  is  strong,  and  just,  and  faultless  ;  but  man  is 
frail,  and  subjugated  [paterno  delicto]  by  the  offence  of  his 
progenitor,  that  he  is  unable  to  use  his  power  with  regard  to 
yielding  obedience  to  the  law.  He  must  therefore  flee  to  the 
mercy  of  God,  that  he  may  avoid  the  severity  of  the  law,  and 
being  exhonerated  from  his  transgressions,  may,  with  regard 
to  other  things,  resist  his  enemy  under  the  favor  of  heaven. 

£ut  to  perform  that  which  is  good  I  find  not.']  Therefore, 
that  which  is  commanded  by  the  law  is  pleasing  to  him,  and 
his  will  is  to  do  it ;  but,  in  order  to  its  completion,  power  and 
virtue  are  wanting ;  because  he  is  so  oppressed  by  the  power 
of  sin,  that  he  cannot  go  where  he  would  ;  neither  is  he  able 
to  contradict,  because  another  is  the  lord  and  master  of  his 
power.  (Ibid.) 

That  he  may  extol  the  grace  of  God,  the  apostle  expounds 
these  words,  concerning  the  great  evils  from  which  it  has  de- 
livered man  ;  that  he  might  point  out  what  destructive  mate- 
rials he  derives  from  Adam,  but  what  blessings  through  Christ 
have  been  obtained  for  him  whom  the  law  could  neither  succor 
nor  relieve.  {Ibid.) 

Let  the  whole  [of  the  rest  of  the]  passage  be  perused. 


366  JAMES  AEMINTUS. 

13.  JEROME. 

We  have  sinned,  and  have  committed  iniquity,  and  have 
done  wickedly,  and  have  rebelled,  ^c]  Undoubtely  the  three 
Hebrew  children  had  not  sinned,  neither  were  they  of  that 
[accountable]  age  when  they  were  led  away  to  Babylon,  so  as 
to  be  punished  for  their  vices.  Therefore,  as  they  here  speak 
in  the  person  of  their  nation  at  large,  so  we  must  read  and  ap- 
ply that  passage  of  the  apostle,  "  for  what  I  would,  that  do  I 
not,"  &c.    {On  Dan.  ix.) 

m.     THE  OPINION  OF  ST.  AUGUSTINE. 

1.  Q^TJOTATiom  from  his  writings.  2.  These  passages  confirm 
the  interpretation  of  the  author.  It  is  objected,  that  St. 
Augusthie  afterwards  gave  a  different  Explanation,  and 
retracted  his  former  opiJiion  ;  to  this  the  reply  is,  it  appears 
that  his  interpretation  of  this  chap)ter  was  free  from  any 
such  change.  3.  What  St.  Augustine  properly  retracted 
is  shown  by  quotations  from  his  writings.  4.  His  modesty 
in  the  explanation  of  this  chapter.  He  understands  this  pas- 
sage to  refer,  not  to  actual  sins,  but  to  the  internal  w,otions 
of  concupiscence. 

1.  But  let  us  approach  to  St.  Augustine,  and  see  what  was 
his  opinion  concerning  this  passage,  since  my  opinion  is  loaded 
and  oppressed  with  the  weight  of  his  authority : 

If  then  I  do  that  lohich  I  would  not,  I  consent  unto  the  law 
that  it  is  good.']  The  law  is  indeed  sufficiently  defended  from 
all  crimination.  But  we  must  be  on  our  guard  to  prevent  any 
one  from  supposing,  that,  by  these  words,  the  free  exercise  or 
choice  of  the  will  is  taken  away  from  us ;  which  is  not  the  fact. 
For  now  is  described  a  man  placed  under  the  law,  before  [the 
arrival  of]  grace.  {Exposition  of  certain  Propositions  from 
the  Epistle  to  the  Roma7is,  cap.  7.) 

But  I  see  another  law  in  my  mernbers,  warring  against  the 
law  of  my  mind,  (&c.']  He  calls  that  "  the  law  of  sin"  by 
which  every  one  is  bound  who  is  entangled  in  [consuetudine']  the 
habit  or  nature  of  the  flesh.  He  says  that  this  wars  against 
"  the  law  of  the  mind,"  and  "  brings  it  into  captivity  to  the 


DISSERTATION. 


367 


law  of  sin."  From  this,  the  man  is  understood  to  be  described 
who  is  not  jet  under  grace.  For,  if  the  carnal  habit  or  na- 
ture were  only  to  maintain  a  warfare,  and  not  to  bring  into 
captivity,  there  would  not  be  condemnation.  For  in  this  con- 
sists condemnation — that  we  obey  and  serve  corrupt  and  carnal 
desires.  But,  if  such  desires  still  exist  and  do  not  all  disap- 
pear^ yet  in  this  case  we  do  not  yield  obedience  to  them,  we 
are  not  brought  into  captivity,  and  we  are  now  under  grace, 
concerning  which  he  speaks  when  he  cries  out  for  the  aid  of 
the  Deliverer,  that  this  might  be  possible  through  the  grace  of 
love,  which  fear  was  not  able  to  do  through  the  law.  For  he 
has  said,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver  me 
from  the  body  of  this  death  ?"  And  he  added,  "  the  grace  of 
God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."  He  then  begins  to  de- 
scribe man  placed  under  grace^  which  is  the  third  degree  of 
those  four  into  which  we  have  distinguished  mankind.  (Ibid.) 

But  not  being  yet  content  with  the  past  inquiry  and  expla- 
nation, lest  I  had,  with  too  much  negligence,  passed  by  any 
thing  in  it,  (Kom.  vii,)  I  have  still  more  cautiously  and  atten- 
tively examined  the  very  same  words  of  the  apostle,  and  the 
teaor  of  their  meanings.  For  you  would  not  consider  it  proper 
to  ask  such  things,  if  the  manner  in  which  they  may  be  un- 
derstood were  easy  and  devoid  of  difficulties.  For,  from  the 
passage  in  which  it  is  written — "  What  shall  we  say  then?  Is 
the  law  sin  ?  God  forbid,"  unto  that  in  which  the  apostle  says, 
"  I  find  then  a  law,  that,  when  I  would  do  good,"  &c.,  and,  I 
believe,  as  far  the  verse  in  which  it  is  said,  "  0  wretched  man 
that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver  me  from  the  body  of  this  death  ? 
The  grace  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord" — you  wished 
me  to  elucidate  or  resolve  the  question  first  from  these  passa- 
ges, in  which  the  apostle  seems  to  me  to  have  transfigured  unto 
himself  a  man  placed  under  the  law^  with  whose  words 
he  speaks  from  his  own  person.  {To  Simplicianus^  the  Bish- 
op of  the  Church  of  Milan.) 

Hence  it  is  evident,  fiest,  that  the  church  had  at  that  period 
prescribed  nothing  definite  concerning  the  meaning  of  this 
passage:  For  Simplicianus,  the  bishop  of  Milan,  indeed,  offi- 


<J68  JAMES  ARMINIUS. 

dating  in  the  very  Church  in  which  St.  Ambrose  had  formerly 
discharged  the  episcopal  functions,  would  not  have  earnestly 
requested  to  have  the  opinion  of  St.  Augustine,  if  the  opinion 
to  be  maintained  concerning  it  had  been  prescribed.  Second- 
ly. After  St.  Augustine  had  diligently  considered  the  matter, 
he  openly  declares,  that  the  whole  passage  must  be  understood 
as  referring  to  a  man  under  the  law. 

"  For,"  he  says,  "  I  was  without  the  law  once."  By  this  he 
plainly  shews  that  he  was  not  speaking  'pro'perly  in  his  own 
person,  but  generally  in  the  person  of  "  the  old  man."  {Ihid.) 

He  afterwards  subjoins  the  cause  why  it  is  so,  and  says, 
"  For  we  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual,  but  I  am  carnal,"  in 
which  he  shews,  that  the  law  cannot  be  fulfilled  except  by 
spiritual  persons,  who  do  not  become  such  without  the  aid  of 
grace.  (Ihid.) 

Indeed,  when  he  had  said — "  but  I  am  carnal,"  he  also  sub- 
joined the  kind  of  carnal  man  that  he  was.  For  even  those 
who  are  now  placed  under  grace,  and  who  are  now  redeemed 
by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  born  again  through  faith,  are  call- 
ed "  carnal"  after  a  certain  manner  ;  to  whom  the  same  apos- 
tle says,  "  And  I,  brethren,  could  not  speak  unto  you  as  unto 
si^iritual,  but  as  unto  carnal,"  &c.  (1  Cor.  iii,  1.)  But  that  man 
who  is  still  under  the  law  and  not  under  grace,  is  so  very  car- 
nal as  not  yet  to  be  born  again  from  sin,  but  to  be  sold  under 
the  law  by  sin  ;  because  the  price  of  deadly  pleasure  embraces 
that  sweetness  by  which  a  man  is  deceived  and  delighted  to 
act  even  contrary  to  the  law,  since  the  pleasure  is  greater  in 
proportion  to  its  unlawfulness,  &c.  "He  consents,  therefore, 
to  the  law  of  God,"  inasmuch  as  he  does  not  what  it  prohibits, 
but  chiefly  by  not  willing  that  which  he  does.  For,  not  being 
yet  liberated  by  grace,  he  is  conquered  [by  sin],  although 
through  the  law  he  is  both  conscious  that  he  is  acting  improp- 
erly, and  is  reluctant.  But  with  regard  to  that  which  follows, 
where  he  says,  "  ISTow  then  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin 
that  dwelleth  in  me  ;"  he  does  not,  therefore,  say  it,  because 
he  does  not  consent  to  commit  sin,  though  he  consents  to  the 
law  by  disapproving  of  the  sin  which  he  commits.    But  he  is 


DISSERTATION. 


369 


still  speaking  in  the  person  of  a  man  placed  under  the  law, 
who  is  not  yet  under  grace,  and  who  is  indeed  drawn,  by 
reigning  concupiscence  and  bj  the  deceitful  sweetness  of  pro- 
hibited sin,  to  perpetrate  evil,  though,  through  his  knowledge 
of  the  law,  he  partly  diapproves  of  such  bad  actions.  But 
this  is  the  reason  why  he  says,  "  It  is  no  more  I  that  do  it," 
because,  being  conquered,  he  does  it,  since  it  is  done  by  [cupi- 
ditas^']  evil  desires,  to  whose  conquering  power  he  yields.  But 
grace  causes  him  no  longer  thus  to  yield,  and  strengthens  the 
mind  of  man  against  lusts,  of  which  grace  the  apostle  is  now 
about  to  treat.  {Ibid) 

See  also  what  immediately  follows  this  quotation. 

"  To  will  is  present  with  me."  He  says  this  with  respect  to 
facility.  For  what  can  be  more  easy,  to  a  man  placed  under 
the  law,  than  to  will  that  which  is  good,  and  to  do  what  is  evil? 
&c.  {Ihid.) 

But  the  whole  of  this  is  said  for  the  purpose  of  shewing  to 
man,  while  yet  a  captive,  that  he  must  not  presume  on  his  own 
strength  or  power.  On  this  account  he  reproved  the  Jews  as 
proudly  boasting  about  the  works  of  the  law,  when  they  were 
attracted  by  concupiscence  to  whatsoever  was  unlawful,  though 
the  law,  of  which  they  boasted,  declared  "  Thou  shalt  not 
covet,"  or  indulge  in  concupiscence.  Therefore,  a  man  who  is 
conquered,  condemned  and  captivated,  must  humbly  declare 
— a  man  who,  after  having  received  the  law,  is  not  as  [victo7'i] 
one  that  lives  according  to  the  law,  but  is  rather  a  transgres- 
sor of  it,  must  humbly  exclaim,  wretched  man  that  I  am," 
&c.  (IMd.) 

2.  That  man  who  will  compare  these  passages  from  St.  Au- 
gustine with  my  arguments  concerning  Komans  vii,  will  per- 
ceive that  we  entirely  agree  in  sentiment,  and  that  I  subscribe 
to  this  opinion  of  St.  Augustine.  From  these  extracts,  it  like- 
wise appears  that  nothing  had,  at  that  period,  been  prescribed 
by  the  church  concerning  this  portion  of  the  apostolical  writings, 
but  nothing  towards  that  part  especially — that  it  was  to  he 


370  JAMES  AEMINIUS. 

understood  about  a  man  who  is  regenerate  and  placed  undef 
grace. 

But  I  am  here  met  with  this  objection  :  "  St.  Augustine,  in 
subsequent  years,  gave  a  different  explanation  to  this  chapter, 
that  is,  as  being  applicable  to  a  regenerate  man  placed  under 
grace,  as  he  has  done  in  the  43d,  45th,  and  47th  of  his  Dis- 
courses On  Time^  and  in  several  other  passages."  I  confess 
that  the  fact  was  as  it  is  here  stated ;  and  we  will  afterwards 
examine  those  passages ;  we  shall  perceive  how  much  they 
are  able  to  contribute  towards  the  establishment  of  the  opinion 
that  is  opposed  to  mine. 

"But,"  the  same  objectors  say,  "St.  Augustine  retracted  and 
condemned  that  very  opinion  which  he  had  first  explained  in 
his  treatise,  entitled.  An  Exposition  of  certain  Propositions  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  in  his  book  addressed  to  Sim- 
plicianus,  hishop  of  Milan ;  his  authority,  therefore,  cannot 
be  adduced  in  coufirmation  of  that  opinion." 

To  this  I  might  reply,  fiest,  from  the  fact  of  St.  Augustine 
having  first  entertained  the  same  opinion  about  this  passage  as 
I  do,  and  afterwards  a  different  one,  it  is  evident  that  neither 
of  these  opinions  had  been  considered  by  the  church  in  the 
light  of  a  catholic  or  universal!}^  admitted  doctrine.  Second- 
ly. It  is  possible  that  St.  Augustine  may,  in  the  beginning, 
have  held  a  more  correct  opinion  than  that  which  he  subse- 
quently maintained,  especially  when,  in  the  first  instance,  he 
followed  his  own  judgment,  which  had  been  formed  from  an 
accurate  inspection  of  the  entire  chapter,  and  from  a  diligent 
comparison  of  different  sentiments  on  the  subject;  but  he 
w^as  afterwards  influenced  by  the  authority  of  certain  inter- 
preters of  holy  writ,  as  he  informs  us  in  his  Ketractations,  (lib. 
i,  cap.  23,)  though  he  adds,  that  he  had  with  much  diligence 
considered  the  subject ;  for  he  did  not  consider  it  without  some 
of  that  prejudice  which  he  had  imbibed  from  the  authority  of 
those  expositors. 

3.  But  though  I  might  make  those  preliminary  replies,  yet 
the  answer  which  I  will  give  is  this  :  St.  Augustine  never  re- 
tracted or  condemned  that  opinion  by  which  he  had  explained 


DISSEETATION. 


371 


this  chapter  as  applicable  to  a  man  placed  under  the  law  ;  but 
he  only  retracted  this  part  of  his  early  opinion — These  words 
must  not  be  received  as  uttered  in  the  person  of  the  apostle 
himself,  who  was  then  spiritual,  but  in  that  of  a  man  placed 
under  the  law  and  not  yet  under  grace."  For  he  had  made 
two  assertions,  first,  that  thia  chapter  must  be  understood  as 
relating  to  a  man  placed  under  the  law.  Secondly,  that  it 
must  neither  be  understood  as  relating  to  a  man  placed  under 
grace,  nor  as  relating  to  the  apostle  himself  who  was  then  spir- 
itual. The  former  of  these  assertions  was  never  retracted  by 
St.  Augustine  ;  the  latter  he  has  retracted,  as  w^ill  most  clearly 
appear  to  any  one  who  will  examine  the  passage,  which  it  will 
be  no  trouble  to  transcribe  on  this  occasion,  since  the  works  of 
this  father  are  not  in  the  hands  of  every  one.  In  the  first 
book  of  his  "  Eetractations,"  (cap.  23,)  he  says  : 

"  While  I  was  yet  a  priest,  it  happened  that  the  Epistle  of 
the  apostle  to  the  Romans  was  read  among  us  who  were  at 
that  time  together  at  Carthage,  and  my  brethren  made  inqui- 
ries of  me  about  some  passages  in  it,  to  which  when  I  had  given 
as  proper  replies  as  I  was  able,  it  was  the  wish  of  my  breth- 
ren that  what  I  spoke  on  this  subject  should  be  written  out, 
rather  than  be  uttered  [sine  Uteris]  in  an  extemporaneous 
manner ;  when,  on  this  point  I  had  acceded  to  their  request, 
another  book  was  added  to  my  Opuscula.  In  that  book  I  say, 
'  But  when  the  apostle  asserts.  For  we  Imow  that  the  law  is 
spiritual  I  hut  I  am  cafnal^  sold  under  sin,  he  shews  in  a 
manner  sufiiciently  plain,  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  law  to 
be  fulfilled  by  any  persons,  except  by  those  who  are  spiritual, 
and  are  made  such  by  the  grace  of  God.'  This  I  wished  not 
to  be  received  in  the  person  of  the  apostle,  who  was  at  that 
time  spiritual,  but  in  that  of  a  man  placed  under  the  law,  and 
who  was  not  yet  under  grace.  For  that  was  the  manner  in 
which  I  first  understood  these  words  ;  which  T  afterwards  con- 
sidered with  more  diligence,  after  having  perused  the  produc- 
tions of  •  certain  [tractatorihus']  commentators  on  the  divine  or- 
acles, by  whose  authority  I  was  moved ;  and  I  perceived  that, 
when  he  says  for  we  hnow  that  the  law  is  spiritual  ^  hut  1  am 
carnal,  sold  under  sin,  the  words  may  also  be  understood  as 


372 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


referring  to  the  apostle  himself.  This  I  have  shewn,  with  as 
much  diligence  as  I  was  able,  in  those  books  which  I  have  late- 
ly written  against  the  Pelagians. 

"  In  this  book,  therefore,  I  have  said  that,  by  the  words  but 
I  am  carnal^  sold  imder  sin,  through  the  remainder  of  the 
chapter  to  the  verse  in  which  he  saj^s,  0  wretched  man  that  I 
am!  a  man  is  described  who  is  still  under  the  law,  but  not  yet 
placed  under  grace,  who  wills  to  do  that  which  is  good,  but 
who,  conquered  by  the  desires  of  the  flesh,  does  that  which  is 
evil.  From  the  dominion  of  this  concupiscence  the  man  is 
not  delivered,  except  by  the  grace  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord,  by  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  through  whom  love 
being  diffused,  or  shed  abroad,  in  our  hearts,  overcomes  all  the 
desires  of  the  flesh,  that  we  may  not  consent  to  those  desires 
to  do  evil,  but  rather  that  we  may  do  good.  By  this,  indeed, 
is  now  overturned  the  Pelagian  heresy,  that  will  not  admit  that 
the  love  by  which  we  live  good  and  pious  lives  is  from  God  to 
us,  but  that  asserts  it  to  be  from  ourselves. 

"  But  in  those  books  which  we  have  published  against  the 
Pelagians,  we  have  shewn,  that  the  words  of  the  apostle  in 
Hom.  vii,  are  better  understood  as  those  of  a  spiritual  man 
who  is  now  placed  under  grace — on  account  of  the  body  of 
flesh  which  is  not  yet  spiritual,  but  which  will  be  so  in  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  on  account  of  carnal  concupi- 
scence itself,  with  which  the  saints  maintain  such  a  conflict, 
not  consenting  to  it  for  evil,  as  not  to  be  without  its  opposing 
motions  in  this  life,  which  yet  they  resist.  But  the  saints  will 
not  have  such  motions  to  evil  in  that  world  in  which  death  will  be 
swallowed  up  in  victory.  Therefore,  on  account  of  this  con- 
cupiscence and  those  motions  to  which  such  a  resistance  is 
given  as  they  may  still  be  in  us,  [or  as  suffers  them  yet  to  be  in 
us,]  every  holy  person  who  is  now  placed  under  grace  can 
utter  all  those  words  which  I  have  here  said  are  the  expres- 
sions of  a  man  who  is  not  yet  placed  under  grace,  but  under 
the  law.  To  shew  this,  would  require  much  time ;  and  I  have 
mentioned  the  place  where  I  have  shewn  it."  {Ibid) 

"  Of  the  books  which  I  wrote  when  a  bishop,  the  firet  two 
were  addressed  to  Simplicianus,  bishop  of  the  church  of  Milan, 


DISSERTATION. 


373 


who  was  successor  to  the  blessed  Ambrose — in  them  I  discuss- 
ed diverse  questions.  Two  of  the  questions  on  which  I  treated 
in  the  first  book,  were  from  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Ivomans. 
The  first  of  them  was  on  what  is  written  in  vii,  7 — What  shall 
we  say  then  7  Is  the  law  sin  7  God  forbid  ! — down  to  the  25th 
verse  in  which  it  is  said,  Who  shall  deliver  me  from  the  body 
of  this  death  f  The  grace  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord.  In  that  book,  I  have  expounded  these  woi-ds  of  the 
apostle,  The  law  is  spiritual^  hut  I  am  carnal^  and  the  other 
expressions  by  which  the  flesh  is  shewn  to  contend  against  the 
Spirit.  In  it  I  have  explained  them  in  such  a  manner  as  that 
in  which  a  man  is  described  who  is  still  under  the  law,  but  not 
yet  placed  under  grace.  For  a  long  time  afterwards  elapsed,  be- 
fore I  discerned  that  they  could  also  be  the  words  of  a  spirit- 
ual man,  and  this  with  a  stronger  semblance  of  probability." 
{Eetractations^  lib.  2,  cap.  1.) 

4.  These  are  the  passages  transcribed  with  verbal  accuracy, 
in  which  St.  Augustine  retracts  the  opinion  which  he  had  pre- 
viously explained,  from  which  it  is  apparent  that  he  neither 
rejected  his  former  opinion,  nor  convicted  it  of  falsehood,  error 
or  heresy';  but  that  he  only  said,  "  This  passage  in  the  apos- 
tle's writings  may  also  be  understood  as  referring  to  a  man  who 
is  regenerate,  spiritual,  and  placed  under  grace,  and  this  much 
better  and  with  more  probability  than  concerning  a  man  placed 
under  the  law yet  he  says  that  this  [his  first]  opinion  is  op- 
posed to  the  Pelagian  heresy.  But  the  very  words  which  he 
employs  in  his  Retractations  teach  us,  that  this  chapter  in  the 
apostolical  writings  may  likewise  be  understood  concerning  a 
man  who  is  placed  under  the  law,  but  [according  to  his  latest 
judgment]  not  so  well,  and  with  less  probability. 

We  see  therefore,  that  the  modesty  of  St.  Augustine  was  at 
an  immense  distance  from  the  vehemence  of  those  who  assert, 
that  "  this  part  of  holy  writ  must  be  understood  concerning  a 
man  who  is  placed  under  grace,  nor  can  it  by  any  means  be 
explained  as  referring  to  a  man  placed  under  the  law  without 
incurring  the  charge  of  Pelagian  heresy."  Let  the  reader  ex- 
amine, if  he  pleases,  the  works  of  St.  Augustine,  (torn.  10,) 


374 


JAMES  ABMmiUS 


concernivg  the  words  of  the  aioostle^  (Sermon  5,  on  Eom.  vii, 
7,  fol.  59,  cul.  3,)  "  Speak  to  me,  holy  apostle,  about  thyself, 
when  no  one  doubts  that  thou  art  speaking  about  thyself." 

And  in  the  same  sermon,  (col.  4,)  "If,  therefore,  I  say  that 
the  apostle  speaks  of  himself,  I  do  not  affirm  it." 

But  it  is  improper  for  this  last,  whether  it  be  an  explanation 
or  a  retractation  of  St.  Augustine,  to  be  urged  by  those  who 
reject  the  cause  of  this  change,  by  which,  he  openly  declares, 
he  was  moved  to  suppose  that  this  passage  might  likewise  be 
t  explained  in  reference  to  a  man  under  grace,  and  this  much 

better  and  with  greater  probability.  He  says  that  the  cause 
of  it  was,  because  he  perceived  that  this  man  might  be  called 
"  carnal"  on  account  of  the  body  of  fleoh  which  is  not  yet  spir- 
itual, ai  d  because  he  has  yet  within  him  the  desires  of  the 
flesh,  though  he  does  not  consent  to  them.  This  is  also  the 
•  opinion  of  those  expounders  whom  St.  Augustine  says  he 
followed. 

But  our  divines  who  oppose  themselves  to  me  on  Romans 
vii,  do  not  explain  that  chapter  in  this  manner,  as, — to  will 
that  which  is  good^  is  to  will  not  to  lust  or  indulge  in  unlawful 
desires,  and  to  do  evil,  is  to  lust ;  but  they  explain  it,  actually 
to  do  or  to  commit  that  which  is  evil.  The  authority,  there- 
fore, of  St.  Augustine  ought  not  to  be  produced  by  them ;  be- 
cause, as  we  shall  afterw^ards  more  clearly  demonstrate,  his 
judgement  was  this  :  If  this  chapter  he  explained  as  referring 
to  actual  sins,  it  cannot  he  explained  concerning  a  regenerate 
man.  But  if  it  he  explained  respecting  a  regenerate  man,  it 
must  necessarily  he  understood  only  concerning  the  inward 
motions  of  concupiscence  or  lust. 

Wherefore,  I  have  St.  Augustine  in  his  first  opinion,  fully 
agreeing  with  me,  and  in  his  latter  not  differing  greatly  from 
me  ;  but  those  who  are  opposed  to  me  have  St.  Augustine  con- 
trary and  adverse  to  them  in  both  these  his  opinions. 


DISSERTATION. 


375 


IV.     OTJE   OPINION   IS  SUPPORTED  BY  SEVERAL  WRITERS  OF  THS: 
MIDDLE  AGES. 

1.  Yenerable  j^e<f6.  2.  St.  Paulinus.  Z.  Nicholas  De  Lyra. 
4.  Ordinary  Gloss.  5.  Interlinear y  Gloss.  6.  Hugh  the 
cardinal.  7.  Thomas  Aquinas^  who  thinks  that  Romans 
vii,  14,  may  he  explained  in  loth  ways^  hut  he  prefers  its 
application  to  a  regenerate  man.  8.  He  is  of  opinion.,  that 
the  17th  and  ISth  verses  can  only  he  consider edhg  a  forced 
construction  to  relate  to  a  man  under  sin.  His  reasons  for  . 
advancing  this  last  assertion  are  examined  and  answered. 
9.  An  ahhreviation  of  the  comments  which  Thomas  has 
given  on  these  two  verses  /  with  a  conclusion  deduced  from 
the7n^  that  they  may  he  appropriately  understood  to  relate 
to  a  man  under  the  law.,  hut  in  no  other  than  a  forced  man- 
ner to  a  man  under  grace. 

1.    venerable  bede. 

For  ice  Tcnow  that  the  law  is  spiritual^  hut  I  am  carnal^ 
Perhaps,  therefore,  it  is  some  other  person,  or  perhaps  thjself. 
Either  thou  art  the  person,  or  I  am.  If,  therefore,  it  be  some 
one  of  ns,  let  us  listen  to  him  as  if  concerning  himself,  and, 
divesting  our  minds  of  angry  feelings,  let  us  correct  ourselves. 
But  if  it  be  he,  [the  apostle,]  let  us  not  thus  understand  what 
he  has  said,  "  What  I  would,  that  do  I  not ;  but  what  I  hate, 
that  do  I."    {On  Romans  vii.) 

Therefore,  because  he  thrice  entreated  the  Lord,  that  this 
thorn  might  be  taken  away  from  him  ;  and  because  he  who  was 
not  heard  according  to  his  wishes,  was  heard  according  to  that 
which  was  for  his  healing ;  he  perhaps  does  not  speak  in  a 
manner  that  is  unbecoming  when  he  says  "The  law  is  spiritual, 
but  I  am  carnal."  {Ihid.) 

2.     ST.  PAULINUS. 

And  I  am  perfectly  aware  that  this  blessed  man  prefers  to 
employ  my  weakness;  and,  lamenting  concerning  my  afflic- 


3^ 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


tions,  he  cries  out,  instead  of  me,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I 
am  !"  {Second  Epistle  to  Sever  us  Sulpicms,  Priest  at 
Tours.) 

3.     NICHOLAS  DE  LYRA. 

For  we  Jmow  that  the  law  is  spiritual]  and  [ordtnansl 
placing  men  in  right  order  to  follow  the  instigation  of  the 
Spirit  or  of  reason.    {On  Romans  vii.) 

But  I  am  earnal]  that  is,  I  follow  the  impulse  of  the  flesh 
or  of  sensuality  ;  and  the  apostle  speaks,  as  was  before  observ- 
ed, in  the  person  of  the  fallen  human  race,  in  which  there  are 
more  persons  who  follow  the  imx)ulse  of  sensuality  than  that 
of  reason. 

After  the  inward  man]  that  is  according  to  the  natural  dic- 
tates of  reason  ;  because  reason  is  called  the  inward  man," 
and  sensuality    the  outward  man." 

O  wretched  man  that  I  am  !]  In  this  passage,  he  conse- 
quently begs  to  be  delivered,  speaking  in  the  person  of  all 
mankind,  '^O  wretched  man  that  I  am"  through  the  corruption 
of  nature ! 

So  then.,  with  the  mind^  I  serve  the  law  of  God]  that  is, 
according  to  the  inclination  of  reason. 

But  with  the  fleshy  the  law  of  sin]  by  following  the  incli- 
nation of  the  flesh. 

^.  4.     OKDTNAET  GLOSS. 

"  For  we  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual,"  &c.,  quoted  to  the 
end  of  the  chapter.]  It  is  not  perfectly  clear  whether  these 
things  are  better  understood  as  spoken  in  his  own  person,  or 
in  that  of  all  mankind.    {On  Romans  vii.) 

5.     INTERLINEART  GLOSS. 

But  I  am  carnal]  unable  to  resist  [yitio]  .he  corruption  of 
my  mind  or  the  devil.    {On  RomoMs  vii.) 


DISSERTATION. 


377 


Sold  under  sin]  in  mj  first  parent,  that  I  may  be  really 
under  sin  as  a  servant. 

JVow  then  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  if]  under  the  law  before 
the  times  of  grace. 

Evil  is  present  with  me]  with  my  reason  ;  it  is  near  to  my 
inward  man. 

I  see  another  law]  the  fuel  or  flame,  which  reigns. 

Warring  against  the  lav)  of  my  mind]  the  law  and  my 
reason  united  together  in  one. 

Bringing  me  into  captivity]  through  consent  and  working, 
because  it  governs  [consuetudine]  by  habit  or  custom. 

To  the  law  of  sin]  for  sin  is  the  law,  because  it  has  the 
dominion. 

The  grace  of  God?^  not  that  the  law,  nor  my  own  powers, 
but  that  the  grace  of  God  delivers. 

So  then  with  the  mind]  the  rational  and  inward  man,  hav- 
ing, as  before,  fuel. 

6.     HUGH  THE  CARDINAL. 

For  we  hnow  that  the  law  is  spiritual.]  This  is  the  third 
part  of  the  chapter,  in  which  he  shews,  that  those  things  which 
were  commanded  in  the  law  of  Moses,  cannot  be  fulfilled  with- 
out the  law  of  the  Spirit,  that  is,  without  grace. 

But  I  am  carnal]  that  is,  frail  and  weak  to  resist  the  devil 
and  the  lust  of  the  flesh. 

For  what  I  would]  according  to  reason,  that  is,  I  approve. 

But  what  I  hate]  that  is,  evil.  But  from  this  it  is  interred 
that  he  wants  the  spiritual  law,  by  which  he  may  do  that  which 
he  wills  according  to  reason. 

There  is^  therefore^  now  no  condemnation.]  The  preceding 
things  have  been  expounded  concerning  the  captivity  of  mor- 
tal sin  under  which  man  was  carnally  living,  and  concerning 
the  captivity  of  the  venial  sin  of  the  man  who  is  in  grace  ; 
and  that  the  law  of  the  Spirit,  or  grace,  delivers  from  the  cap- 
tivity of  death  ;  and  he  draws  this  inference :  "  There  is, 
therefore,  now  no  condemnation,"  that  is,  no  mortal  sin  through 
which  is  condemnation. 

25  TOL  n. 


JAMES  ARMINIU8. 


Y.     THOMAS  AQUINAS. 

But  1  am  carnal^  He  shews  the  condition  of  the  man :  And 
this  expression  may  be  expounded  in  two  ways.  In  one  way, 
that  the  apostle  is  speaking  in  the  person  of  a  man  who  is  in 
sin.  And  St.  Augustine  expounds  it  thus  in  the  83d  book  of 
his  Questions,  But,  afterwards,  in  his  book  against  Julian,  he 
expounds  it,  that  the  apostle  may  be  understood  to  speak  in 
his  own  person,  that  is,  of  a  man  placed  under  grace.  Let  us 
proceed,  therefore,  in  declaring  what  kind  of  words  these  are, 
and  those  which  follow  them,  and  how  they  may  be  differently 
expounded  in  either  manner,  though  the  second  mode  of  expo- 
sition is  the  best.    {On  Romans  vii.) 

I  am  fully  aware  that  the  same  Thomas  has  marked  out  two 
passages  in  this  chapter,  which  he  asserts  it  to  be  impossible  to 
explain  concerning  an  unregenerate  man  except  by  a  distorted 
interpretation.  But  it  will  repay  our  labor  if  we  inspect  those 
passages,  and  examine  those  reasons  which  moved  Thomas  to 
hold  this  sentiment.  The  first  passage  is  the  lYth  verse :  "Kow 
then  it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me." 
The  second  passage  is  the  18th  verse:  "For  I  know  that  in 
me  (that  is,  in  my  flesh)  dwelleth  no  good  thing." 

(1.)  He  says  "that  the  first  of  these  passages  cannot,  except 
by  a  distorted  interpretation,  be  understood  concerning  a  man 
who  is  under  sin  ;  because  the  sinner  himself  perpetrates  that 
Bin,  while  he  is  one  who,  according  to  the  principal  part  of 
himself,  that  is,  according  to  his  reason  and  mind,  consents  to 
the  perpetration  of  sin.  But  this  must  properly  be  attributed 
to  a  man,  which  belongs  to  him  according  to  what  is  man ; 
but  he  is  a  man  by  his  mind  and  his  reason." 

But  I  answer,  first.  It  is  said,  not  only  respecting  a  man 
who  is  under  sin,  that  he  does  not  perpetrate  sin  except  with 
his  mind  and  reason,  which  dictate  that  sin  is  forbidden  by  the 
law,  which  yet  are  conquered  through  the  lust  of  the  flesh,  and 
by  the  consent  of  the  will,  but  it  is  likewise  said  respecting 
the  regenerate  and  those  who  are  under  grace ;  for  these  per- 
>6ons  do  not  actually  commit  sin  except  with  a  mind  that  is 


DISSBRTATION, 


379 


conquered,  and  through  consent  of  the  will ;  and,  therefore, 
it  is  a  vain  attempt  to  be  desirous  to  distinguish,  in  this  man-  * 
ner,  between  him,  who  is  under  sin  and  him  who  is  under 
grace. 

Secondly.  I  deny  that  all  those  who  are  under  sin  commit 
iniquity  with  the  consent  of  their  mind,  that  is,  without  any 
resistance  of  conscience.  For  when  those  persons  who  are 
under  the  law,  sin,  they  do  this  against  conscience  and  with  a 
mind  that  is  reluctant,  because  they  are  overcome  by  the  tyr- 
anny of  sin  and  carnal  concupiscence. 

Thirdly.  Though  the  matter  really  were  as  he  has  stated  it, 
yet  it  would  not  follow  that  it  cannot  be  said  of  this  man  by 
any  interpretation,  except  a  distorted  one :  "It  is  no  more  he 
that  commits  this  sin,  but  it  is  sin."  A  reason  is  produced  by 
Thomas  himself ;  for  the  man  does  this  through  the  motion 
and  compulsion  of  sin  which  dwelleth  in  him  and  has  the 
dominion.  But  effects  are  usually  ascribed  to  the  principal 
causes  ;  therefore,  this  verse  may  be  understood,  without  any 
distorted  meaning,  to  relate  to  a  man  who  is  under  the  law. 

If  any  one,  according  to  the  judgment  of  St.  Augustine, 
declare — "  It  cannot  be  attributed  to  a  man  who  actually  gives 
his  consent  to  sin,  that  he  does  not  himself  commit  it,  hut  sin, 
and,  therefore,  the  perpetration  of  it  must  be  understood  as 
relating  not  to  the  consent  to  evil  and  the  commission  of  it,  but 
to  concupiscence  or  evil  desire,  and  thus  this  act  belongs  to  a 
man  under  grace,"  to  this  objection,  I  reply  that  I  deny  the 
antecedent,  as  I  have  previously  observed  ;  but  I  confess  that 
if  it  be  understood  concerning  concupiscence  alone,  and  not 
concerning  the  consent  to  sin  and  the  actual  perpetration  of 
it,  the  expression  contained  in  this  verse  can  by  no  means,  not 
even  distortedly,  be  employed  concerning  a  man  who  is  under 
the  law  and  under  sin. 

(2.)  Thomas  says  "  that  the  latter  of  these  passages,  the  18th 
verse,  cannot  be  explained,  except  in  a  distorted  manner,  con- 
cerning a  man  under  sin^  on  account  of  the  correction  which 
is  added,  and  which  it  was  unnecessary  to  adduce  if  the  dis- 
course were  about  a  man  under  sin,  as  being  one  who  has  no 
good  thing  dwelling  either  in  his  flesh  or  in  his  mind." 


380 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


To  this,  I  reply  that  the  antecedent  is  false ;  for  we  have 
already  demonstrated,  in  the  remarks  on  this  18th  verse,  that, 
in  the  mind  of  a  man  who  is  under  the  law,  some  good  exists 
and  dwells,  as  Thomas  here  employs  the  word  to  dwell — nay, 
that  it  also  reigns  and  has  the  dominion,  as  the  word  onght 
properly  to  be  received.  Therefore,  the  ignorance  of  Thomas 
about  this  matter,  caused  him  thus  to  think  and  to  write. 

9.  But  let  the  entire  comment  of  Thomas  on  this  passage  be 
perused,  and  it  will  then  appear,  that  all  these  things  in  the 
two  verses  may  be  explained  in  the  plainest  manner  concern- 
ing a  man  under  the  law^  but  with  much  perversion  and  con- 
tortion about  a  regenerate  man  who  is  placed  under  grace^ 
I  show  this  in  the  following  brief  manner,  having  united  to- 
gether, in  a  compendious  summary,  those  things  which  he  has 
treated  with  greater  prolixity,  as  any  one  may  perceive  on 
referring  to  his  pages  : 

"  If  the  man  or  the  reason  be  Q2L\\Qdi  fleshly  or  c<2rna/ because 
he  is  attacked  by  the  flesh — if  to  do  signifies  the  same  as  to  lust 
or  desire — if  to  will  good,  and  not  to  will  evil,  be  taken  for  a 
complete  volition  and  nolition,  which  continue  in  the  election 
or  choice  of  a  particular  operation  ; — but  if  to  commit  evil, 
and  not  to  do  good,  be  understood  according  to  an  incomplete 
act,  which  consists  only  in  the  sensitive  appetite,  not  reach- 
ing so  far  as  to  the  consent  of  reason — if  this  captivity 
be  produced  solely  at  the  motion  of  concupiscence — if  deliv- 
erance from  the  body  of  this  death  be  desired,  that  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  body  may  be  totally  removed,  then  the  expression 
in  this  passage  of  Scripture  must  be  understood  concerning  a 
regenerate  and  just  man,  who  is  placed  under  grace. 

"  But  if  this  man  or  reason  be  called  fleshly  or  carnal  be- 
cause he  is  in  subjection  to  the  flesh,  consenting  to  those  things 
to  which  he  is  instigated  by  the  flesh — if  to  do  be  the  same 
thing  as  to  execute  hy  actual  operation — if  to  will  that  which 
is  good,  and  not  to  will  what  is  evil,  be  taken  in  the  acceptation 
of  an  incomplete  volition  and  nolition,  by  which  men  will  good 
in  general  and  do  not  will  what  is  evil,  and  if  they  do  neither 
of  these  in  particular  i — but  if  to  commit  evil,  and  not  to  do 
good,  be  understood  according  to  a  complete  act,  which  is 


,    DISSERTATIOIT.  S81 

■0- 

exercised  in  external  operation  tbrougli  the  consent  of  reason 
. — if  this  captivity  be  produced  through  consent  and  operation 
or  doing,  and,  lastly,  if  deliverance  from  the  body  of  this  death 
be  desired  or  asked,  that  the  corruption  of  the  body  may  not 
have  dominion  over  the  mind,  drawing  it  to  commit  sin,  then 
the  expressions  in  this  passage  must  be  understood  concerning 
a  man  who  is  a  sinner,  and  who  is  placed  under  the  law." 

But  let  us  now  subjoin — A  ijjan  who  is  attacked  by  the  flesh, 
yet  who  conquers  it  in  the  conflict,'  is  not  called  fleshly  or 
carnal  /  but  this  appellation  is  bestowed  on  the  man  who,  by 
yielding  his  consent,  is  brought  into  subjection  to  the  flesh. — 
The  apostle  is  here  treating  about  a  volition  and  a  nolition  that 
are  incomplete  and  imperfect,  and  about  the  actual  perpetra- 
tion of  evil  and  the  omission  of  good,  and  not  solely  about  the 
act  or  motion  of  lusting  or  desiring ;  (for  this  is  declared  by 
the  matter  itself,  for  the  man  wills  and  does  not,  therefore  the 
volition  is  imperfect.)  This  captivity  is  not  at  the  motion  of  con- 
cupiscence alone,  but  it  is  by  consent  and  operation  ;  for  either 
concupiscence  itself,  or  the  law  of  the  members,  brings  a  man 
into  captivity  through  the  waging  of  war  against  the  law  of  the 
mind ;  and  the  deliverance  w^hich  is  required  is  from  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  body,  that  it  may  not  have  dominion  over  the 
mind,  and  not  that  it  may  be  totally  removed ;  for  the  apostle 
presents  a  thanksgiving  to  God  for  having  obtained  that  which 
he  had  desired.  Therefore,  this  pass-^ge  must  be  understood, 
not  about  a  man  under  grace,  but  about  one  who  is  under  the 
law  ;  not  about  a  man  who  is  already  restored  by  grace,  but 
about  one  who  is  yet  to  be  restored. 

Our  proposition  is  taken  from  Thomas  Aquinas.  We  have 
added  the  assumption  from  the  text  itself. 


JAMES  AEMINITJS. 


Y.   THE  FAYOKABLE  TESTIMOI^IES  OF  MOEE  EE- 
CENT  DIYINES. 

1.  Haimo.    2.  Bruno.    3.  Foiher  Stapulensis.    4.  Eras- 
mus.   5.  Whitaher.    6.  Bucer.    7.  Musculus. 

Let  us  now  likewise  examjae  some  of  the  more  modern 
divines  of  the  church. 

1.  HAIMO. 

0  wretched  man  that  I  am.']  He  speaks  in  the  person  of 
the  human  race,  or  in  the  person  of  those  who  are  departing 
from  their  sins. 

2.  BEUNO. 

Observe  that  St.  Paul  significantly  speaks  about  all  men 
under  his  own  person,  assuming  to  himself  the  person  of  one 
who  is  sometimes  hefore  the  law,  and  at  other  times  under  the 
law. 

3.     FABEK  STAPTJLENSIS. 

St.  Paul  transfers  to  himself  a  carnal  man,  and  one  who  feels 
ihe  weakness  of  the  flesh,  when  he  was  by  no  means  a  person 
of  that  description,  but  was  living  entirely  after  the  Spirit. 
But  he  transfigures  himself  into  a  weak  person  to  those  who 
are  weak. 

4.  ERASMUS. 

Since  I  have  now,  for  the  purpose  of  instructing  you,  taken 
upon  myself  the  person  of  a  man  who  is  still  liable  to  vices 
and  affections.    {Paraphrase  on  Romans  vii.) 

5.  WHITAKEB. 

But  I  am  carnal.,  sold  under  sin^  &c.]  They  interpret 
the  whole  of  this  passage  so  as  to  Bay  that  St.  Paul  does  not 


DISSERTATION. 


383 


speak  concerning  himself,  but  in  the  person  of  a  man  who  is 
not  yet  born  again.  {Controversy  respecting  the  Interpreta- 
tion of  Soripture^  Quest,  ^^fol.  508.) 

6.  BUCEE. 

The  question  is,  "Which  of  these  agrees — that  we  will 
what  is  good,  yet  do  it  not,  or.  that  we  do  what  is  evil,  and  yet 
do  not  will  it,  but  hate  it— nay,  that  we  commit  evil,  and  that 
we  do  not  commit  it?"  For  the  apostle  affirms  both  these 
things. 

The  solution  is  this :  We  shall  be  able  to  understand  these 
things  as  truly  and  properly  spoken,  from  this  circumstance — 
if  it  be  evident  of  what  description  of  man  St.  Paul  is  here 
speaking  under  [exemplo]  the  instance  of  himself,  and  then 
what  original  sin  is  capable  of  producing. 

But  if  we  consider  what  the  apostle  confesses  about  himself 
in  this  chapter,  it  is,  I  think,  abundantly  evident  that  he  pro- 
poses, in  himself,  the  example  of  a  man  to  whom  the  law  of 
God  is  known,  and  by  whom  it  is  loved.  For  he  says — "  I 
consent  unto  the  law  that  it  is  good  ;  I  will  that  which  is  good, 
and  I  hate  evil.  To  will,  is  present  with  me.  With  the  mind, 
I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God."  These  undoubtedly  are  not 
the  traits  of  a  wicked  or  profane  man,  and  of  one  who  is  not 
yet  approaching  to  God  ;  but  they  are  those  of  a  holy  man 
who  loves  God  and  who  trembles  at  his  words.  For  God  rescues 
us  by  certain  degrees  from  that  death  into  which  we  are  all 
born.  First,  he  suffers  us,  for  some  time,  to  live  in  ignorance^ 
[securos']  disregarding  his  judgments.  At  this  period,  "  sin  is 
*  '  dead,"  &c.  But  when  it  has  pleased  God  to  terminate  this 
ignorance,  he  sends  forth  his  law,  and  gives  us  to  see  that  it  is 
"  holy,  and  just,  and  good."  From  this,  it  necessarily  arises 
that  "  we  consent  to  the  law,"  that  we  will  what  it  commends, 
and  that  we  are  abhorent  from  those  things  which  it  condemns. 
But  if  the  Spirit  of  Christ  do  not  afford  unto  us  powerful  succor, 
this  love  of  God  and  consent  to  his  law  remain  so  weak,  and 
the  force  of  sin  which  is  still  within  us  prevails  so  strongly, 
that,  through  the  correction  and  command  of  the  law,  the 


384: 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


depraved  lusts  become  the  more  inflamed,  and  we  occasionally 
do,  not  only  by  lusting  or  desiring,  but  also  by  actually  com- 
mitting, that  which  we  ourselves  detest,  and  we  neglect  those 
things  of  which  we  are  not  capable  of  duing  otherwise  than 
approving  and  willing.  But  these  things  cause  the  dread  of 
the  divine  judgment  to  increase  within  us,  by  which  we  are 
completely  unnerved,  and  deprived  of  sensation. 

All  these  effects  are  produced  by  the  law,  but  through  [vitio] 
the  corruption  of  our  depraved  nature ;  and  it  is  the  condi- 
tion of  the  period  now  mentioned,  which  the  apostle  describes 
in  himself  in  the  present  chapter.  But  whilst  God,  who  is 
the  Father  of  mercies,  resolves  moi»e  fully  to  impart  himself 
to  us,  and  vouchsafes  more  bountifully  to  bestow  the  Spirit  of 
his  Son  upon  us,  by  this,  his  Sp'rit,  he  represses  and  subdues 
that  power  of  sin  which  otherwise  impels  us  against  the  law 
and  [jiis]  authority,  how  much  soever  we  may  consent  to  the 
law  itself;  he  implants  within  us  a  true  judgment  concerning 
things,  and  a  solid  love,  [honesti]  for  that  which  is  upright  and 
honorable,  so  that  now,  with  pleasure,  and  with  a  confirmed 
and  perpetual  [studio]  inclination  or  purpose,  we  live  the  life 
of  God.  This  condition  of  holy  people  is  described  by  the 
apostle  in  the  subsequent  chapter,  in  which  he  declares  that 
"the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  had  made  him 
free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."    (Rom.  viii,  2.) 

As,  therefore,  the  apostle  in  this  place  begins  to  declare 
what  the  law,  of  itself,  effects  in  holy  people,  and  from  this 
begins  to  commend  it  when  it  is  so  exceedingly  beneficial,  yet 
he  asserts  that  it  cannot  render  a  man  just  betoie  God,  but  that 
it  drives  him  to  Christ  who  alone  can  justify.  And  he 
brings  forward  in  this  place,  and  points  out,  the  condition 
of  a  man  of  God,  which  is  that  of  the  middle  age  of  holy 
people,  in  which  the  law  is  indeed  already  known,  but  not  yet 
fully  inscribed  on  the  heart ;  that  is,  when  the  mind  of  man 
consents  to  the  law  of  God,  but  the  appetite  of  nature  still 
offers  resistance,  and  impels  to  act  in  opposition  to  the  precepts 
of  the  law.  I  repeat  it,  in  this  condition,  the  apostle  has  pro- 
posed himself  for  an  example,  that  he  might  point  out  in  him- 
self what  power  the  law  possessed,  and  how  all  things  are 


DISSERTATION. 


385 


death,  until  the  Spirit  of  Christ  [penitius  movet]  obtains 
greater  influence  within  us.  But  St.  Paul  did  not  still  contend 
with  his  nature  after  the  manner  which  is  described  in  this 
passage,  for  he  soon  afterwards  declares  that  "  the  law  of  the 
Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  had  made  him  free  from  the  law 
of  sin  and  death,"  and  that  through  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  "  the 
righteousness  of  the  law  was  now  fulfilled  in  him,  as  he 
walked,  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit."  {On  Ro- 
mans vii.) 

7.  WOLFGANG  MUSCTJLITS. 

.  The  law,  indeed,  has  righteousness  and  justification,  by  com- 
manding those  things  which  are  just.  But  it  is  impossible 
that  it  should  have  that  by  which  to  justify;  for  it  is  hindered 
and  rendered  inefScacious  through  the  flesh,  that  is,  through 
the  corrupt  and  depraved  inclinations  of  the  flesh,  through 
which  it  comes  to  pass  that  a  man  who  is  carnal,  and  the  slave 
of  sin,  is  incapable  of  obeying  those  commands  which  are 
holy,  and  just,  and  good.  {Common  Places  in  the  chapter  on 
the  Laws^  under  the  title  of  The  Power  and  Efficacy  of  tJie 
Law.) 

We  say  that  the  power  and  efiicacy  of  the  law,  which  is 
called  "  the  letter,"  is  two-fold.  The  one  is  that  which  it  pro- 
duces of  its  own,  and  may  be  called  proper.  Tne  other  is 
improjj^r^  which  it  does  not  bring  from  itself,  but  which  it 
performs  through  the  corruption  of  our  flesh.  The  first  is 
proper,  because  it  produces  the  knowledge  of  sin.  On  this 
subject,  the  apostle  speaks  thus  :  "  I  had  not  kown  sin  but  by 
the  law  ;  for  I  had  not  known  lust  except  the  law  had  said, 
Thou  shaltnot  covet.''''  (Rom.  vii,  7.)  He  also  says,  "  By  the 
law  is  the  knowledge  of  sin."  (iii,  20.)  {Ihid) 

He  afterwards  not  only  speaks  about  "  the  knowledge  of 
sin,"  which  consists  of  the  understanding,  but  he  also  speaks 
principally  about  that  knowledge  of  it  which  is  received  by 
[yivo^  a  lively  feeling  of  sin  in  our  flesh  ;  that  is,  the  law  cau 
ses  me  not  only  to  understand,  but  likewise  witli  gnawing  re- 
morse of  conscience  to  feel  and  to  experience  that  sin  is  within 


386 


JAMES  ARMINTUS. 


me.  It  is  proper^  because  it  convinces  us  that  we  are  inexcu- 
eablj  guilty  of  sin,  subjects  and  condems  us  to  malediction, 
(G-al.  iii,  10,)  and,  through  a  feeling  of  sin,  and  when  terrified 
of  condemnation,  it  renders  us  anxious,  and  desirous  of  the 
grace  of  God.  Hence,  arises  that  which  is  the  subject  of  the 
apostle's  investigation  in  Romans  vii,  when  at  length  he  cries 
out,  "  O  wretched  man  that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver  me  from 
the  body  of  this  death .?  The  grace  of  God  through  Jesus 
Christ."  {Ihid) 

After  the  apostle,  in  Komans  vii,  has  disputed  about  the 
power  and  efficacy  of  the  law,  which  works  in  carnal  and  nat- 
ural men,  speaking  in  the  next  chapter  pf  the  grace  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  which  is  bestowed  on  those  who  believe  in  Christ, 
he  subjoins — "  for  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus 
hath  made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death,"  &c.  {Ihidy 
under  the  title  of  the  Law  of  the  Spirit) 

St.  Paul  understands  "  the  law  of  sin"  to  be  the  power  and 
tyranny  of  sin  reigning  in  our  flesh,  by  which  we  are  violently 
dragged  and  impelled  to  commit  sin.  "  The  law  of  death"  is 
that  by  which  sinners  are  adjudged  to  death  eternal.  Therefore 

the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life"  not  only  produces  this  effect  in 
us,  that  we  are  not  condemned  on  account  of  the  imputation 
of  righteousness  which  is  through  faith  in  Christ ;  but  it  like- 
wise extinguishes  the  power  of  sin  in  us,  that  sin  may  now  nO 
longer  reign  in  us,  but  \yirtus]  the  strength  and  grace  of  Christ, 
and  that  we  may  no  more  serve  sin,  but  righteousness,  nor  be 
obnoxious  to  death,  but  challenged  and  claimed  for  the  true 
life.  {lUd) 

For  the  more  lucid  explanation  of  this  matter,  we  must  ob- 
serve the  three  degrees  of  the  saints,  by  which  they  are  di- 
vinely led  to  the  perfection  of  piety  :  The  first  is  of  those  who 
resemble  drunken  men,  and  who,  having  for  some  time  lulled 
to  sleep  all  judgment  and  every  good  inclination,  live  in  sins, 
the  law  of  God  not  having  yet  produced  its  effect  in  them ; 
the  second  degree  is  of  those  who,  by  what  way  soever  they 
may  have  returned  to  themselves,  the  judgment  of  their  rea- 
son being  now  illuminated,  and  their  inclinations  changed, 
desire  that  which  is  good,  and  thus  consent  to  the  law  of  God 


DISSERTATIOir. 


387 


and  delight  in  it,  and  really  abhor  that  which  is  evil ;  but  the 
tyranny  of  sin  still  prevailing,  they  are  reluctantly  drawn  to 
evil  things ;  and,  therefore,  the  good  of  which  they  approve, 
and  which  they  desire  and  will,  they  perform  not ;  but  the 
evil  which  they  hate  and  avoid,  they  perpetrate,  though  their 
consciences  exclaim  against  it,  and  though  the  judgment  of 
their  minds  dictate  something  far  different,  &c.  To  this  sec- 
ond degree  must  be  referred  those  things  of  which  St.  Paul 
here  treats  in  his  own  example.  The  third  degree  is  of  those 
who  have  been  rescued  into  the  liberty  of  righteousness,  after 
'having,  through  the  Spirit,  subdued  and  conquered  the  power 
and  wickedness  of  sin,  that  they  do  not  now  obey  the  law  of 
«in,  but  the  law  of  the  Spirit  that  reigns  in  their  members, 
and  possesses  the  double  faculty  of  willing  and  doing.  About 
this  degree,  the  apostle  will  treat  in  the  subsequent  chapter. 
'(Comment  on  Romans  vii.) 

/  thank  God  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord?^  A  most 
wonderful  and  sudden  turn  of  the  affections.  He  had  just 
before  deplored  himself  as  a  wretched  man  and  a  cajptim^  and 
almost  immediately  he  gratefully  returns  thanks.  From  this, 
we  perceive  that  St.  Paul  now  uses  his  own  person,  not  that 
which  he  sustained  when  he  wrote  these  things,  but  that  which 
he  had  formerly  represented.  (^Ibid.) 

There  is,  therefore,  now  no  condemnation.']    As  he  had  pre- 
viously described  the  condition  of  the  man  who  was  living  in  a  • 
legal  spirit,  so  now  he  describes  and  points  out  the  condition 
of  him  who  is  endued  with  the  evangelical  Spirit,    {On  Ro- 
mans viii.) 

The  mutual  and  unanimous  agreement  of  the  witnesses 
whom  I  have  here  produced,  will,  according  to  my  judgment, 
very  easily  liberate  my  opinion  from  all  surmise  and  suspicion 
•of  novelty. 


388 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


THIED  PAET. 

I.     THIS  OPINION  IS  NEITHER  HERETICAL  NOR  ALLIED  TO  ANT 

HERESY. 

1.  In  this  third  part^  two  things  are  contained :  the  first  is  a 
negative — that  this^  my  interpretation  of  Eomans  vii  is  not 
favorable  to  the  Pelagian  heresy.  The  prijicipal  dogmas 
of  the  Pelagian  heresy  are  recounted  from  St.  Augiisti7ie, 
2.  It  is  proved  hy  induction  and  hy  comparison  that  this 
interpretation  agrees  with  none  of  these  dogmas.  6.  Two 
rejoinders  to  the  contrary.  An  answer  to  the  first  of  thern^ 
that  every  good  thing  mast  not  he  taken  away  from  the  un- 
regenerate.  4.  An  answer  to  the  second.  The  truth  must 
he  confirmed.^  and  falsehood  refuted^  hy  solid  arguments, 
5.  It  is  proved  from  St.  Angus  tine  that  the  doctrine  which 
relates  to  the  necessity  of  the  grace  of  Christy  and  to  the 
impossihility  of  the  law  for  the  conquest  of  si7i,  was  ac- 
counted hy  the  ancie7its  to  he  of  far  more  importance  than 
that  which  proves  the  peipetual  imperfection  of  the  regene- 
rate in  this  life.  6.  Td  this^  the  fathers  of  the  Council  of 
Carthage  seem  to  give  their  assent^  in  their  epistle  to  Pope 
Innocent. 

Thesis. — 'Eo  heresy,  neither  that  of  Pelagius  nor  any  other, 
can  be  derived  or  conrinned  from  this  opinion.  But  this  opin- 
ion is,  in  the  most  obvious  manner,  adverse  to  Pehigianism, 
and  affords  a  signal  and  professed  confutation  ol  its  grand  and 
leading  falsehood. 

1.  This  thesis  contains  two  parts.  The  first  is,  that  this 
opinion  is  neither  heretical,  nor  allied  to  heresy.  The  second 
that  it  is  directly  contrary  to  the  Pelagian  heresy,  and  profes- 
sedly refutes  it. 

With  regard  to  the  first  of  these  parts,  because  it  consists 
of  a  negation,  those  who  maintain  the  affirmative  of  it  must 
destroy  it  by  the  proof  of  the  contrary.    1  am  desirous,  there- 


DISSERTATION. 


389 


fore,  to  hear  from  til  em  what  heresy  it  is  which  this  opinion  advo- 
cates and  tavors.  They  will  undoubtedly  announce  it  to  be 
that  of  Pelagius.  But  I  require  a  proof  of  the  particular 
point  in  which  there  is  the  least  agreement  between  this  opin- 
ion and  Pelagianism.  Let  us  shew,  however,  ex  ahundanti, 
that  this  opinion  is  not  favorable  to  Pelagianism. 

The  following  heads  of  doctrine  are  those  which  St.  Augus- 
tine has  laid  down  in  his  book  on  Heresies  and  his  Ilypognos- 
ticori,  as  belonging  to  Pelagianism  : 

(i.)  Whether  Adam  had  sinned,  or  had  not  sinned,  he  would 
have  died, 

(ii.)  The  sin  of  Adam  was  injurious  to  no  one  except  to 
himself;  and  thcTefore, 

(iii.)  Little  children  do  not  contract  original  sin  from  Adam ; 
neither  will  they  perish  from  life  eternal,  if  they  depart  out 
of  the  present  life  without  the  sacrament  of  baptism. 

(iv.)  Lust  or  concupiscence  in  man  is  a  natural  good  ;  nei- 
ther is  there  any  thing  in  it  of  which  man  may  be  ashamed. 

(v.)  Through  his  free  will,  as  per  se^  man  is  sufficient  for 
himself,  and  is  nble  to  will  what  is  good,  and  to  fulfill  or  per- 
fect that  which  he  wills.  Or  even,  for  the  merits  of  works, 
God  bestows  grace  on  every  one. 

(vi.)  The  life  of  the  just  or  the  righteous  in  this  life  has  in 
it  no  sin  whatsoever  ;  and  from  these  persons,  the  church  of 
Christ  in  this  state  ot  mortality  are  completed,  that  it  may  be 
altogether  without  spot  or  wrinkle. 

(vii.)  Pelagius,  being  compelled  to  confess  grace,  says  that  it  is 
a  gift  conlerred  in  creation,  is  the  preaching  of  the  law,  and  the 
illumination  of  the  mind,  to  know  those  things  which  are 
good  and  those  which  are  evil,  as  well  as  the  remission  of  sins 
if  any  one  has  sinned,  excluding  from  this  [definition  of  gi'ace] 
love  and  the  gift  and  assistance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  without 
which,  he  says,  the^goud  which  is  known  may  be  performed, 
though  he  acknowledges  that  this  grace  has  also  been  given 
for  this  purpose — that  the  thing  may  be  the  more  easily  done, 
which  can  indeed  be  otherwise  done  by  the  power  of  nature, 
but  yet  with  greater  difficulty. 
2.  These  are  the  principal  dogmas  of  the  Pelagian  heresy, 


390' 


JAMES  ARMINITJS. 


to  which  others,  if  any  such  there  be,  may  be  referred.  But 
none  of  these  dogmas  are  patronized  by  the  opinion  which  < 
explains  Romans  vii,  as  applicable  to  a  man  placed  under  the  ■ 
law,  and  in  the  manner  in  which  we  have  explained  it,  and  aa 
St.  Augustine  has  declared  it  in  his  book  entitled  "  The  Expo- 
sition of  certain  Propositions  from  the  epistle  to  the  Romans," 
and  in  his  first  book  to  Simplicianus.  This  will  be  proved 
thus  by  induction : 

(i.)  Our  opinion  openly  professes  that  sin  is  the  only  and  ■■ 
sole  meritorious  cause  of  death,  and  that  man  would  not  have 
died,  ha^  he  not  sinned. 

(ii.)  By  the  commission  of  sin,  Adam  corrupted  himself  and 
all  his  posterity,  and  rendered  them  obnoxious  to  the  wrath  of 
God. 

(iii.)  All  who  are  born  in  the  ordinary  way  from  Adam, 
contract  from  him  original  sin  and  the  penalty  of  death  eternal. 
Our  opinion  lays  this  down  as  the  foundation  of  further  expla- 
nation ;  for  this  original  sin  is  called,  in  Romans  vii,  "  the 
sin,"  "  the  sin  exceedingly  sinful,"  "  the  indwelling  sin,"  "  the 
sin  which  is  adjacent  to  a  man,  or  present  with  him,"' 
or  "  the  evil  which  is  present  with  a  man  and  "  the  law  in  the. 
members." 

(iv.)  Our  opinion  openly  declares  that  concupiscence^  under 
which  is  also  comprehended  lust,  is  an  evil. 

(v.)  The  fifth  of  the  enumerated  Pelagian  dogmas  is  pro- 
fessedly refuted  by  our  opinion ;  for,  in  Romans  vii,  the 
apostle  teaches,  according  to  our  opinion,  that  the  natural  man 
cannot  will  what  is  good,  except  he  be  under  the  law,  and  un- 
less the  legal  spirit  have  produced  this  willing  in  him  by  the 
law ;  and  though  he  wills  what  is  good,  yet  it  is  by  no  means 
through  free  will,  even  though  it  be  impelled  and  assisted  by 
the  law  to  be  capable  of  performing  that  very  thing.  But  it 
also  teaches  that  the  grace  of  Christ,  that  is,  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  of  love,  is  absolutely  necessary  for  this  pur- 
pose, which  grace  is  not  bestowed  according  to  merits,  (which 
are  nothing  at  all,)  but  is  purely  gratuitous. 

(vi.)  The  sixth  of  the  enumerated  dogmas  of  Pelagius  ia 
neither  taught  nor  refuted  by  our  opinion,  because  it  maintains 


DISSERTATION. 


391; 


that  Romans  vii  does  not  treat  about  the  regenerate.  But,  in 
the  mean  time,  the  patrons  and  advocates  of  our  opinion  do 
not  deny  that  what  is  said  respecting  the  imperfection  of  be- 
lievers in  the  present  life,  is  true. 

(vii.)  The  seventh  of  the  enumerated  dogmas  of  Pelagius  is 
refuted  by  our  opinion  ;  for  it  not  only  grants,  that  good  can 
with  difficulty  be  done  by  the  man  who  is  under  the  law,  and 
who  is  not  yet  placed  under  grace ;  but  it  also  [simpliciter] 
unreservedly  denies  that  it  is  possible  for  such  a  man  by  any 
means  to  resist  sin  and  to  perform  what  is  good. 

3.  But  some  one  will  perhaps  rejoin,  and  say  "  Your  inter- 
pretation of  this  chapter  is  favorable  to  Pelagianism,  on  two 
accounts.  Fiest,  because  it  attributes  something  of  good  to 
a  man  who  is  not  yet  regenerated  and  placed  under  grace. 
Secondly,  because  it  takes  away  from  the  church  a  passage  of 
Scripture,  by  which  she  is  accustomed  to  prove  the  imperfec- 
tion of  the  regenerate  in  the  present  life,  and  the  conflict  which 
is  maintained  between  the  flesh  and  the  Spirit  as  long  as  man 
lives  upon  earth." 

With  regard  to  the  fiest  of  these  objections,  I  reply  that  we 
must  see, 

Fiest,  what  kind  of  good  it  is  that  our  interpretation 
attributes  to  a  man  who  is  unregenerate.  For,  it  is  certain  that 
every 'good,  of  what  kind  soever  it  may  be,  must  not  be  en- 
tirely taken  away  frcfti  an  unregenerate  man  and  one  who  is 
not  yet  placed  under  grace ;  because  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth,  (Romans  i,  18,  19,)  the  work  of  the  law  written  in  his 
heart,  his  thoughts  accusing  or  else  excusing  one  another,  the 
discernment  of  what  is  just  and  unjust,  (ii,  15, 18,)  the  knowl- 
edge of  sin,  grief  on  account  of  sin,  anxiety  of  conscience, 
desire  of  deliverance,  &c.,  (vii,  7,  9,  13,  24,)  are  all  good 
things,  and  yet  they  are  attributed  to  a  man  who  is  unre- 
generate. 

Secondly.  We  must  know  that  this,  our  opinion,  which 
explains  Romans  vii  as  relating  to  a  man  under  the  law,  does 
not  bring  forth  these  good  things  from  the  storehouse  of 
nature,  but  it  deduces  them  from  the  operation  of  the  Spirit, 
who  employs  the  preaching  of  the  law  and^.  blessps  it. 


392 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


Thirdly.  We  must  also  consider  that  this  was  not  a  subject 
of  controversy  between  the  church  and  the  Pelagians  :  "  May 
something  of  good  be  attributed  to  an  unregenerate  man  who 
is  not  yet  under  grace,  but  who  is  placed  under  the  law ;  or 
may  it  not?"  But  the  question  between  them  was  "  Can  some- 
thing of  good  be  attributed  to  man,  without  grace  and  its 
operation  ?"  He  who  receives  some  operation  of  grace  is  not 
instantly  under  grace  or  regenerate  /  for  grace  prepares  the 
will  of  man  for  itself,  that  it  may  dwell  in  it.  Grace  knocks 
at  the  door  of  our  hearts  ;  but  that  which  has  occasion  to 
knock  does  not  yet  reside  in  the  heart  nor  has  it  the  dominion^ 
though  it  may  knock  so  as  to  cause  the  door  to  be  opened  to 
it  on  account  of  its  persuasion.  But  we  have  frequently 
treated  on  topics  similar  to  this  in  the  first  part  of  this  our 
treatise. 

4.  With  respect  to  the  second  of  these  objections,  I  reply, 
First.  This  passage  of  Holy  Writ  was  not  produced  by  the 
church,  in  her  earliest  days,  for  establishing  the  imperfection 
of  the  regenerate  in  this  life,  and  the  conflict  between  the  flesh 
and  the  Spirit  euch  as  that  which  is  maintained  in  regenerate 
persons ;  for  we  have  already  shewn  that  the  most  ancient 
of  the  Christian  fathers  did  not  explain  Romans  vii  in  refer- 
ence to  the  regenerate,  or  those  who  are  placed  under  ^race ; 
though  it  subsequently  began  to  be  employed,  by  some  divines, 
to  establish  this  dogma. 

Secondly.  It  is  inconsequent  argumentation  to  say  that "  the 
opinion  by  which  some  passage  is  otherwise  explained  than  it 
is  by  the  many,  nay  which  has  been  quoted  by  the  church 
herself  to  destroy  some  heresy,  is  therefore  or  can  be  judged 
to  be  allied  to  heresy,  because  it  takes  away  from  the  church 
a  passage  which  has  been  usually  employed  to  prove  a  tiue 
doctrine,  and  to  refute  a  heresy."  For  if  this  be  not  inconse- 
quent reasoning,  there  will  scarcely  be  one  of  our  divines  who 
w^ill  not  thus  be  deservedly  judged  to  be  allied  to  some  heresy 
or  other,  and  sometimes  indeed  to  a  very  enormous  one.  By 
such  a  law  [of  criticism]  as  this,  Calvin  is  called  "  an  Arian" 
by  the  Lutherans,  because  he  openly  avows  in  his  writings, 
that  "  many  passages  of  Scripture,  which  have  been  adduced 


DISSERTATION. 


893 


by  the  ancient  church  (both  Greek  and  Latin)  to  establish  the 
doctrine  of  the  trinity,  do  not  contribute  in  the  least  to  that- 
purpose,"  and  because  he  gives  to  them  such  a  diiferent  inter- 
pretation. 

Thirdly.  'No  detriment  will  acc  ue  to  the  church  hy  the 
removal  of  this  passage,  [from  the  su!>port  of  the  imperfection 
of  the  regenerate  in  tliis  life,]  as  she  is  furnished  with  a  num- 
ber V  which  is  sufficient!}^  copious)  of  other  passages  to  prove 
the  same  doctrine,  and  to  weaken  the  contrary  one.  This  is 
abundantly  demonstrated  by  St.  Augustine,  wuen  he  pro  3S 
sedly  treats  upon  the  Perfection  of  Bighteousness  in  this  Life 
in  opp  si  ion  to  Ccdestius. 

Ft)aRTULY.  We  must  well  and  carefully  examine  by  what 
passages  of  Scripture,  and  by  what  arguments,  tlie  truth  may 
be  proved,  and  falsehood  refuted,  lest,  if  weak  and  less  valid^ 
and  in  some  degree  doubtful^  passages  and  arguments  be 
adduced,  the  hopes  of  heretics  should  be  elevated,  after  they 
have  demolished  such  weak  bulwarks  as  those,  and  they  should 
suppose  it  possible  to  disprove  and  confute  the  remtiining 
[more  suitable  nd  validj  arguments  on  the  same  subject. 
For  that  man  inflicts  no  slight  injury  on  the  truth  who  props 
it  up  by  weak  arguments ;  and  the  rules  of  art  teach  us,  that 
a  necessary  conclusion  must  be  verified  or  proved  by  necessary 
arguments ;  for  the  conclusion  follows  that  part  [of  a  syllo- 
gism] which  is  the  weakest.  But  it  has  been  already  shewn, 
that  this  portion  of  Scripture  has  not  been  devoid  of  contro- 
versy even  among  the  catholic  commentators  on  the  Holy 
Scriptures. 

Fifthly.  In  what  manner  soever  this  chapter,  as  thus  ex- 
plained according  to  my  mind,  may  not  be  able  to  serve  the 
church  to  prove  the  imperfection  of  the  regenerate  in  the 
present  life,  yet  it  serves  her  for  the  contirmation  of  another 
doctrine,  and  one  of  far  greater  importance,  against  the  Pela- 
gians — that  is,  the  necessity  of  the  grace  of  Christ,  and  the 
incapability  of  the  law  to  conquer  or  to  avoid  sin,  and  to  order 
or  direct  the  Kfe  of  a  man  according  to  its  rule. 

5.  But  we  may  discover,  Irom  vaiioiis  passages  in  the  wri- 

26  "VOL.  II. 


394 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


tings  of  St.  Augustine,  the  vast  difference  which  the  ancient 
church  put  between  the  necessity  of  the  former  of  the  two 
questions  or  doctrines,  [specified  in  the  preceding  paragraph,] 
and  the  latter.    For  instance : 

But  in  that  which  Pelagius  argues  against  those  who  say, 
"  And  who  would  be  unwilling  to  be  without  sin,  if  this  were 
placed  in  the  power  of  man  ?"  he  in  fact  disputes  correctly, 
that  by  this  very  question  they  own  that  it  is  not  impossible, 
because  either  many  persons  or  all  men  wish  to  be  without 
sin.  But  let  Pelagius  only  confess  [unde]  from  what  source 
this  is  possible,  and  peace  is  instantly  established.  For  the 
origin  of  it  is  the  grace  of  God  through  Jesus  Christ,  &c. 
{On  Nature  and  Graoe^  against  the  Pelagians^  cap.  59.) 

There  may  be  some  question  among  real  and  pious  Chris- 
tians, whether  there  has  ever  been  in  this  world,  is  now,  or 
can  possibly  be,  any  man  who  lives  so  righteously  as  to  have 
no  sin  whatsoever.  Yet  he  is  assuredly  void  of  understanding 
who  entertains  any  doubt  whether  it  is  possible  for  a  man  to 
be  without  sin  after  this  life.  But  I  do  not  wish  to  enter  into 
a  contest  about  this  question.  Though  it  seems  to  me  that  in 
no  other  sense  can  be  understood  what  is  written  in  the  Psalms, 
and  in  similar  passages,  if  any  such  there  be  :  "  In  thy  sight 
shall  NO  MAN  LIVING  be  justified  (cxliii,  2  ;)  yet  it  may  be 
shown  that  even  these  expressions  may  be  better  understood 
in  another  sense,  and  that  even  perfect  and  complete  righteous- 
ness, to  which  there  may  be  no  addition,  was  yesterday  in  an 
individual,  while  he  lived  in  the  body,  is  in  him  to-day,  and 
will  be  in  him  to-morrow  while  there  are  still  far  more 
persons,  who,  while  they  do  not  doubt  that  it  is  necessary  for 
them  truly  to  say,  even  to  the  last  day  of  [their  continu- 
ance in]  this  life,  "  Forgive  us  our  trespasses,  as  we  forgive 
them  that  trespass  against  us,"  yet  [confidant']  are  firmly  per- 
suaded that  their  hope  in  Christ  and  in  his  promises  is  real, 
certain  and  firm,  yet  in  no  w^ay  except  by  the  aid  of  the  grace 
of  the  Savior,  Christ  the  crucified,  and  by  the  gift  of  his 
Spirit.  I  do  not  know  whether  that  man  can  be  correctly 
reckoned  in  the  number  of  Christians  of  any  description,  who 


DISSERTATIOH". 


395 


denies  either  that  any  persons  attain  to  the  most  complete 
perfection,  or  that  some  arrive  at  any  degree  whatever  of  pro- 
ficiency in  true  piety  and  righteousness.  {Ihid  cap.  60.) 

Besides,  though  I  am  more  inclined  to  believe  that  there  ia 
not  now,  has  not  been,  and  will  not  be,  any  one  who  is  perfect 
with  such  a  purity  as  this ;  aud  yet  when  it  is  defended  and 
supposed,  that  there  is,  has  been,  or  will  be  such  a  perfect 
man,  as  far  as  I  am  able  to  form  a  judgment,  they  who  hold 
this  opinion  do  not  greatly  or  perniciously  err,  &c.  But  those 
persons  are  most  strenuously  and  vehemently  to  be  resisted, 
who  suppose  it  possible  either  to  fulfill  or  to  perfect  the  right- 
eousness of  the  human  will,  by  its  own  power,  without  the  aid 
of  God,  or  by  aiming  at  it  to  make  some  proficiency.  {On  the 
iSpirit  and  the  Letter^  cap.  2.) 

Consult  likewise  his  treatise  On  Nature  and  Grace^  cap. 
42, 43, 58,  &  63 ;  in  which  he  briefly  says — "  It  is  no  question  at 
all,  or  not  a  great  one,  what  man  is  perfected,  or  the  time 
when  he  becomes  so,  as  long  as  no  doubt  is  entertained  that  it 
is  impossible  for  this  to  be  done  without  the  grace  of  Christ." 

See  also  his  treatise  On  the  Demerits  and  JRemission  of 
Sin^  lib.  2,  cap.  6,  14 ;  and  lib.  3,  cap.  13. 

6.  But  in  order  that  we  may  know  this  to  have  been  the 
opinion  not  only  of  St.  Augustine,  but  also  of  the  church 
universal,  let  us  listen  to  the  bishops  assembled  together  in  the 
Council  of  Carthage,  who  write  in  the  following  manner  to 
Pope  Innocent : 

"  But  in  what  manner  soever  this  question  turns  itself, 
because  though  a  man  is  not  found  in  this  life  without  sin,  yet 
it  may  be  said  to  be  possible  by  the  adoption  of  grace  and  of 
the  Spirit  of  God ;  and  that  [such  perfection]  may  be  attained, 
we  must  urge  most  importunate  entreaties  and  use  our  best 
endeavors.  Whosoever  is  deceived  on  this  point,  ought  to  be 
tolerated.  It  is  not  a  diabolical  impiety,  biit  it  is  a  human 
error,  to  affirm  that  it  must  be  most  diligently  pursued  and 
desired,  though  it  cannot  shew  that  which  it  affirms ;  for  it 
believes  it  possible  for  that  to  be  done  which  it  is  undoubtedly 
laudable  to  will." 

We  perceive,  therefore,  that  Kom.  vii,  when  explained  ac- 


396 


JAMES  ARMEmrS. 


cording  to  my  raind,  is  serviceable  to  the  church  in  establishing 
a  doctrine  of  far  greater  importance  than  that  which  is  de- 
clared from  tlie  other  opinion. 

"  But,"  some  one  will  saj^,  "  it  is  possible  to  establish  both 
these  doctrines,  [the  imperfection  and  the  perfection  of  the 
regenerate,]  from  that  opinion  which  explains  the  chapter  as 
relating  to  a  man  who  is  under  grace."  I  reply,  granting  this, 
yet  I  deny  that  it  is  possible  to  establish  both  in  a  direct  man- 
ner ;  for,  one  doctrine,  that  of  the  imperfection  of  the  regene- 
rate in  this  life,  will  be  directly  proved  from  this  passage,  and 
the  other  will  be  deduced  from  it  by  consequence.  But  it  is 
a  matter  of  much  importance,  whether  a  doctrine  be  confirmed 
by  a  passage  of  Scripture  properly  explained  and  according 
to  the  intention  of  the  Scriptures,  or  whether  it  be  deduced 
from  them  by  the  deduction  of  a  consequence.  For  some 
passages  of  Scripture  are  like  certain  seats,  out  of  which  con- 
troversies ought  to  be  determined  ;  and  those  which  are  of  this 
kind  are  usually  employed  in  a  very  stable  and  safe  manner 
for  the  decision  of  con  ti  overlies. 


DISSERTATION. 


II.     OUR  OPINIO 13  DIRECTLY  OPPOSED  TO  TKE  PELAGIAN 

HERESY. 

1.  The  SECOND  thing  contained  in  this  third  part  is  ari  affir- 
mitioe^  that  oar  interpretation  of  Rnwm^  v\\  is  professedly 
adoerse  to  thi  Pelagian  heresy.  2.  This  is  proved  from 
the  f'lGt.^  that  the  prin'iipil  d)]rn  i  of  thi,t  heresy  is  pro- 
fessedly con^'uted  through  this  very  inte>'p'retatlon.  3.  Irh 
some  passages  of  his  works^  which  are  here  cited.,  St.  Augus- 
tine confesses  -with  s-fffi  dent  plainness.,  that  this  is  true.  4. 
An  OBJECTION  and  an  answer  to  it.  5.  Another  OBTEOTroN — 
that  Prosper  Dysidueus^  the  ^imosatenian^  explains  this 
chapter  in  the  same  manner.  A>rswFR — no  heretic  is  m 
error  on  every  point.  The  Jesuits,  those  myrmidons  of  the 
pope^  ixjjlain  this  chapter  as  ref tarring  to  a  man  placed  under 
grace.  6.  A  third  objection — that  this  interpretation  differs 
from  the  confessions  of  the  reformed  churches.,  which  have 
leen  framed  and  established  by  the  blood  of  martyrs.  An- 
swer— no  article  of  any  confession  is  contrary  to  this 
interpretation  :  No  man  ever  shed  his  blood  for  the  contrary 
interpretation.  Numbers  of  martyrs  were  not  even  once 
interrogated  about  this  article  on  the  perfection  of  righteous- 
ness. 

1.  I  NOW  corae  to  the  second  part  of  the  thesis,  in  which  I 
said,  that  this  chapter,  when  explained  as  referring  to  a  man 
who  is  un.der  the  law,  is  directly  and  professedly  contrary  to 
the  Pelatrian  heresy.  Thoni^h  1  have  already  proved  this  ia 
part,  on  the  occasion  of  replying  to  the  preceding  objection, 
yet  I  will  now  at  sonriewhat  greater  length  teach  and  con- 
firm it. 

2.  We  have  just  seen  that  the  article  of  the  Pelagian  heresy 
which  is  by  no  means  either  the  last  or  the  least,  is  that  in 
which  it  is  asserted  that  a  man  is  able  through  his  own  free 
will,  as  being  of  itself  sufficient  tor  him,  to  fulrill  the  precepts 
of  God,  if  he  be  only  instructed  in  the  doctrine  of  the  law,  so 
as  to  be  capable  of  knowing  what  he  ought  to  perform  and 
what  to  omit. 


398 


JAMES  AEMTNIUS. 


It  appears  that  this  dogma  is  not  only  firmly  refuted,  but 
that  it  is  also  plucked  up  as  if  by  the  roots  and  extirpated, 
according  to  the  very  design  and  purpose  of  the  apostle,  by 
means  of  this  chapter,  when  it  is  understood  as  referring  to  a 
man  under  the  law.  This  is  apparent  from  the  opposition  of 
the  dogma  to  the  context  of  the  apostle.    The  former  says, 

Man,  instructed  by  the  teaching  of  the  law,  is  capable,  by 
the  powers  of  his  free  will  alone,  to  overcome  sin  and  to  obey 
the  law  of  God."  But  the  apostle  declares  that  this  cannot 
be  effected  by  the  powers  of  free  will  and  of  the  law.  He 
sayg,  "  sin  shall  not  have  dominion  over  you  ;  for  ye  are  not 
under  the  law,  but  under  grace,''  (Rom.  vi,  14,)  from  which  it 
is  manifest  that,  if  they  were  under  the  law,  sin  would  have 
the  dominion  over  them — a  consequence  upon  which  he  treats 
more  copiously  in  the  seventh  chapter.  Pelagius  says,  "  Man 
is  able,  without  the  grace  of  Christ,  and  instructed  solely  by 
the  teaching  of  the  law,  to  perform  the  good  which  he  wills, 
through  his  free  will,  and  to  omit  the  evil  which  he  does  not 
will but  the  apostle  declares  that  this  man  "  consents  indeed 
to  the  law  that  it  is  good,  but  that  to  perform  what  is  good  he 
finds  not  in  himself ;  he  omits  the  good  which  he  wills,  and  he 
performs  the  evil  which  he  wills  not."  Therefore,  the  doctrine 
of  the  apostle  is,  independently  of  its  consequence,  directly 
repugnant  to  the  Pelagian  dogma,  and  this,  indeed,  from  the 
seope  and  end  which  the  apostle  had,  in  the  same  chapter, 
proposed  to  himself. 

But,  from  passages  of  this  description,  heresies  are  far  more 
powerfully  convicted  and  destroyed,  than  they  are  from  pas- 
sages accommodated  to  their  refutation  beyond  the  scope  and 
intention  of  the  writer,  though  this  also  be  done  according  to 
the  correct  meaning  of  the  same  passages. 

3.  St.  Augustine  himself  confesses  that,  when  this  chapter 
is  explained  in  reference  to  a  man  under  the  law,  it  is  adverse 
to  the  Pelagian  heresy  : 

"  But,"  says  Pelagius,  "why  should  I  thus  exclaim,  who  am 
now  baptized  in  Christ  ?  let  them  make  such  an  exclamation 
who  have  not  yet  perceived  such  a  benefit,  and  whose  expres- 
sions the  apostle  transferred  to  himself,  if  indeed  this  is  said 


DISSERTATION. 


399 


by  them."  But  this  defence  of  nature  does  not  permit  them 
to  cry  out  with  this  voice.  For  nature  does  not  exist  in  those 
who  are  baptized ;  and,  in  those  who  are  not  baptized,  nature 
has  no  existence.  Or,  if  nature  is  granted  to  be  vitiated  even 
in  baptized  persons,  so  that  they  exclaim,  not  without  sufficient 
reason — O  wretched  mem  that  l  am!  who  shall  deliver  me 
from  the  body  of  this  death  7 — and  if  succor  is  afforded  to 
them  in  that  which  immediately  follows.  The  Grace  of  God 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord^  let  it  now  at  leng  h  be  granted, 
that  human  nature  requires  the  aid  of  a  physician.  {()rh  Nor 
ture  and  Grace^  cap.  54.) 

From  these  remarks  it  is  apparent,  according  to  the  mind  ot 
St.  Augustine,  that  this  passage,  even  when  it  is  understood  in 
reference  to  a  natural  man,  is  destructive  to  that  dogma  Ot 
Pelagius,  in  which  he  asserts  that  the  natural  man  is  able,  by 
the  powers  of  nature,  to  perform  the  law  of  God. 

Thus  also  in  a  passage  upon  which  we  have  already  made 
some  observations  from  his  Retractations^  lib.  1,  cap.  23,  St 
Augustine  openly  affirms  that  this  chapter,  when  explained  as 
relating  to  a  man  under  the  law,  confutes  the  Pelagian  heresy. 
These  are  his  words  :  "By  this,  indeed,  is  now  overturned  the 
Pelagian  heresy,  that  will  not  admit  that  the  love,  by  which  we 
live  good  and  pious  lives,  is  from  God  to  us,  but  that  asserts  it 
to  be  from  ourselves." 

Besides,  if  we  can  obtain  from  them  even  this  admission, 
that  those  who  are  not  yet  baptized  imj^lore  the  aid  of  the  Sa- 
vior's grace,  this  will  indeed  be  no  small  matter  ao^ainst  that 

Of  CD 

false  defence  of  nature,  as  being  sufficient  for  itself,  and  of  the 
power  of  free  will.  For  he  is  not  sufficient  for  himself  whq 
says,  0  wretched  man  that  I  am  I  who  shall  deliver  me  f  or 
else  he  must  be  said  to  possess  full  liberty,  who  still  requires  to 
be  liberated.  {On  nature  and  Grace^  cap.  55.) 

But  at  this  point,  on  account  of  which  we  have  undertaken 
the  consideration  of  these  things,  the  apostle  begins  to  intro- 
duce his  own  person,  and  to  speak  as  if  concerning  himself. 
In  this  passage  the  Pelagians  are  unwilling  that  the  apostle 


400 


JAMES  ARMINIIT8. 


himself  should  be  unrlerstood,  but  assert  that  he  has  transferred 
to  himself  another  man  who  is  yet  placed  under  the  1  )i>v,  and 
not  delivered  through  grace,  in  which  passage  tliej  ought  in- 
deed to  concede  *Hhat  by  the  law  no  man  is  justitied,"  as  the 
same  apostle  has  declared  in  another  part  of  his  writings,  but 
that  the  law  is  of  force  for  the  knowledge  of  sin  and  tlie  trans- 
gression of  the  law  itself,  tbat,  after  sin  has  been  known  and 
increased,  grace  may  be  required  through  faith.  [Against  the 
tu)o  Epistles  of  the  Pelazians  to  Boniface^  lib.  1,  cap.  8  ) 

4.  But,"  some  man  will  say,  ''the  Pelagians  h  ive  interpre- 
ted that  chapter  as  applicable  to  a  man  who  is  unregenerate, 
not  without  good  reason.  Thej^  undoubtedly  knew  that  such 
an  interpretation  was  peculiarly  favorable  to  their  sentiments 
which  they  defended  against  the  church." 

To  this  I  reply,  first,  It  has  already  been  shown,  both  in 
reality,  and  by  the  testimony  of  St.  Augustine,  that  this  chap- 
ter, even  when  understood  as  applicable  to  a  man  under  the 
law,  and  not  yet  regenerate,  is  adverse  to  the  Pelagian  doctrine. 

Secondly.  It  may  have  ha})pened  that  the  Pelagians  sup- 
posed the  chapter  might  be  explained  in  reference  to  a  man 
placed  under  the  law^,  and  not  under  grace,  without  any  con- 
sideration of  the  controversy  in  which  they  were  engaged 
with  the  orthodox. 

Thirdly.  It  cannot  favor  the  sentiments  of  the  Pelagians, 
that  the  apostle  is  said  in  this  chapter  to  be  treating  about  a 
man  under  the  law  ;  but  this  might  be  favorable,  that  they 
adduced  such  a  desa  iption  of  a  man  who  is  under  the  law^ 
as  they  knew  was  accommodated  to  strengthen  their  sentiments. 
For  they  said  that  "  a  man  under  the  law  is  he  who,  by  the 
power  and  instinct  of  nature,  (which  was  not  corrupted  in 
Adam,)  is  able  to  will  that  which  is  good,  and  not  to  will  what 
is  evil  ;  but  who,  through  a  depraved  habit,  was  so  bound  to  the 
service  ot  sin,  as  in  reality,  and  actually  he  was  not  able  to  per- 
form the  good  which  he  would,"  &c.  This  false  description  of 
the  man  might  also  be  met,  not  by  denying  that  the  subject  of  this 
chapter  is  a  man  under  the  law,  but  by  refuting  that  descrip- 
tion. For  heretics  are  not  heretical  on  all  subjects  and  in  ev- 
ery point ;  and  it  is  their  usual  practice  to  intermix  true  things 


DISSERTATION. 


401 


with  those  wliicli  are  false,  and  frequently  on  trne  fonnrlationa 
to  erect  a  sapaistriijtai'e  of  faiseh  >o  Is — [  r^ipaat  it,  01  true 
foundations^  which,  by  some  artirice  or  by  manifest  viulenco 
are  perverted  to  the  support  of  taiselioods. 

5.  It  is  objected  besides,  "It  is  impossible  for  this  opinion 
not  to  be  heretical  or  allied  to  heresy,  wlun  we  see  one  Pros- 
per DysiiJseus,  a  Samosatenian,  who  13  deeply  polluted  by  a 
multitude  of  heresies,  interpreting  Eumans  vii  in  reference  to 
a  man  who  is  not  yet  under  grace,  but  under  the  law,  which 
he  undoubtedly  would  not  have  done,  had  he  not  understood 
that  through  it  he  had  a  mighty  support  for  his  own  heresies." 

Reply. — This  objection  is  truly  ridiculous — as  if  he  who  is 
a  heretic  ought  to  err  in  all  things,  and  can  speak  nothing  that 
is  true,  or  if  he  does  utter  any  truth,  the  whole  of  it  nnist  be 
referred  to  the  confiimation  of  his  heresy.  Even  the  very 
worst  of  heretics  have,  in  some  articles,  held  the  same  santi- 
ments  as  those  of  the  church.  It  is  a  well  known  fact  that  the 
ancient  heretics  endeavored,  and  indeed  were  accustomed,  to 
interpret  many  passages  of  Scripture  against  the  orthodox,  in 
8uch  a  way  as  they  could  not  injure  their  several  heresies. 
Yet  these  very  passages  are,  even  at  the  present  time,  explain- 
ed by  our  theologians  against  the  sense  of  the  ancient  ortho- 
dox, and  in  accordance  with  the  interpretation  of  those  heretics. 
But  such  persons  are  not,  on  this  account,  to  be  denominated 
^'  the  favorers  of  heresies." 

But  I  am  desirous  to  have  it  demonstrated  tome  what  affin- 
ity my  explanation  of  Komans  vii  has  with  Arianism  or  Sa- 
mosatenianism.  If  the  same  person,  who  is  either  an  Arian 
or  a  Samosatenian,  is  likewise  earnest  about  the  perfection  of 
righteousness  in  this  life,  he  will  deny  that  this  chapter  ought 
to  be  understood  as  relating  to  the  regenerate,  not  as  he  is  ei~ 
ther  a  Samosatenian  or  an  Arian,  but  as  he  is  a  Pelagian  or  a 
follower  of  Cielestius. 

If  it  be  allowable  to  reason  in  this  manner,  then  the  opin- 
ion which  explains  this  chapter  as  referring  to  a  man  under 
grace,  will  itself  labor  under  great  prejudices,  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  generally  so  interpreted  by  the  Jesuits,  and  by  their 
leaders,  who  are  the  sworn  enemies  of  the  church  of  Christ, 


402 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


and  of  the  truth,  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  most  able  retain- 
ers of  the  popish  church,  that  is,  of  a  church  which  is  idohx- 
trous,  tyrannical,  and  most  polluted  with  innumerable  here- 
sies. Away,  then,  with  such  a  mode  of  argumentation  as  this, 
about  the  explanation  of  any  portion  of  Scripture  I  Let  it 
never  proceed  from  the  mind  or  the  lips  of  those  persons  who, 
with  a  good  conscience,  have  undertaken  the  defence  of  the 
truth.  Who  does  not  perceive  that  arguments  of  this  kind 
are  employed  for  the  purpose  of  abashing  and  unsettling  the 
minds  of  ignorant  and  imexperienced  hearers ;  that,  being 
blinded  by  a  certain  fear  and  stupor,  they  may  not  be  able  to 
form  a  judgment  on  the  truth,  nay,  that  they  may  not  dare 
to  touch  the  matter  under  controversy,  through  a  vain  fear  of 
heresy  !  Such  artifices  as  these  are  notorious  ;  and  all  men 
of  learning  and  moderation  are  aware  of  them.  Nor  are 
they  capable  of  proving  injurious  to  any  persons  except  to. 
the  unlearned  and  the  simple,  or  to  those  who  have  spontane- 
ously determined  to  wander  into  error.  For  we  have  shewn  that 
this  chapter  has  been  understood  in  the  same  sense  as  we  inter- 
pret it,  by  many  doctors  of  the  church,  who  declared  and  pro- 
ved themselves  to  be  the  most  eminent  adversaries  of  Arian- 
ism,  Samosatenianism,  and  other  heresies,  and  the  most  stren- 
uous defenders  of  the  true  doctrine  concerning  the  Father, 
the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  Gracious  Lord !  What 
a  wide  and  ample  plain  is  here  opened  for  those  persons  who 
feel  a  pleasure  in  thrusting  out  the  most  able  and  efficient  as- 
sertors  of  catholic  doctrine  into  the  camp  of  heretics,  under 
this  pretext,  that  they  interpret  certain  passages  of  Scripture 
which  have  been  usually  adduced  for  the  refutation  of  heresy, 
in  such  a  manner  as  not  to  enable  other  persons  to  attack  her- 
esies with  those  passages  so  interpreted. 

6.  Lastly.  This,  my  explanation  is  burdened  with  an- 
other objection — that  "  it  dilfers  from  the  confessions  of  all 
the  reformed  churches  in  Europe,  for  the  establishment  of 
which  such  a  multitude  of  martyrs  have  shed  their  blood." 

This  argument  likewise,  I  assert,  is  employed,  not  for  teach" 
ing  the  truth,  but  to  inflame  and  blind  the  minds  of  those  who 
listen  to  it,  [prce  furorel  through  the  indignation  whicli  they 


DISSEETATION, 


403 


conceive.  For  I  deny  that — in  any  confession,  whether  that 
of  the  French,  the  Dutch,  the  Swiss,  the  Savoy,  the  English, 
the  Scotch,  the  Bohemian,  or  the  Lutheran  churches,  or  of  any 
other — there  is  extant  a  single  article  that  is  -  contrary  to 
this  interpretation,  or  that  is  in  the  least  weakened  by  this  in- 
terpretation of  Romans  vii.  It  may,  indeed,  possibly  have 
happened  that  some  portion  of  this  chapter  has  been  used  in 
some  confession  for  the  establishment  of  a  doctrine  which 
cannot  be  confirmed  from  it,  unless  it  be  explained  as  relating 
to  a  regenerate  man  who  is  lender  grace.  But  how  does  this 
circumstance  militate  against  him  who  approves  of  the  very 
same  doctrine,  and  defends  it  in  an  earnest  and  accurate  man- 
ner, by  adducing  several  other  passages  of  Scripture  in  its 
support  ?  Such  a  man  affirms  this  alone — that  the  true  doc- 
trine, in  whose  defence  it  has  been  cited,  is  not  sufficiently 
well  defended  by  this  passage  of  holy  writ.  And  what  man 
ever  shed  his  blood,  or  was  compelled  to  shed  it,  because  he 
was  of  opinion  that  this  chapter  ought  to  be  explained  in  ref- 
erence to  a  regenerate  man,  and  not  to  a  man  who  is  under 
the  law  ? 

I  speak  with  freedom,  and  frankly  declare  that,  while  I  am 
listening  to  such  reasons,  I  am  scarcely  able  to  govern  and 
restrain  myself  from  openly  crying  out,  through  grief,  that 
God  would  have  mercy  on  those  who  teach  these  things,  and 
would  put  within  them  a  good  mind  and  a  sincere  conscience, 
lest,  while  rushing  headlong  against  conscience,  they  at  length 
receive  due  punishment  for  the  demerit  of  malignant  igno- 
rance, or  that  he  would  be  pleased  to  hinder  their  attempts,  or 
at  least,  that  he  would  render  them  abortive,  lest  they  should 
injure  the  truth  which  has  been  divinely  manifested,  and  the 
church  of  Christ !  For  I  cannot  put  any  milder  construction 
on  such  expressions,  when  they  proceed  from  men  that  are 
endued  with  knowledge  and  understanding. 

All  those  matters  contained  in  confessions  are  not  equally 
necessary.  All  the  particulars  in  any  confession  are  not  con- 
firmed by  the  blood  of  those  who  are  dragged  away  to  the 
stake  not  for  the  whole  of  that  confession,  but  on  account  of 
some  part  of  it.    And  we  know  that  many  thousands,  of  mar- 


404 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


tyrs  have  sealed  tlie  truth  of  the  gospel  with  their  bloorl,  who 
were  never  questioned  respecting  this  article  of  thu perfection 
or  impirfi'ction  of  righteousness^  and  wi  o  never  expended 
any  thoughts  upon  it.  I  refer  now  to  this  question  :  '*Are 
those  who,  through  Christ,  are  justified  and  sanctified,  ahlein 
this  life  to  fulfill  the  law  of  God  witliout  any  defect,  lliruugh 
the  assistance  of  Christ  and  the  Spirit  of  grace  ?"  For  all 
Christians  are  well  assured,  that,  without  the  grace  ot  Christ, 
they  are  not  able  to  do  any  good  whatsoever.  Wheielore, 
the  use  of  this  kind  of  argument  must  be  laid  aside  by  those 
who  are  good  and  conscientious  inquirers  after  the  truth,  and 
who  endeavor  to  preserve  her  when  she  is  discovered. 


FOUETH  PAKT. 

•THE  OrPOSITE  OPINION  IS  APPROVED  BY  NONE  OF  THE  ANCIENT 
DOGTOKS  OF  THE  CHUKCH. 

1«The  ancients  who  have  interpreted  this  chapter  as  relating 
to  a  man  under  grace^  and  the  w.oderns  who  give  it  asirnilar 
interpretation^  differ  very  materially  from  each  other  /  be- 
cause^ by  the  good  which  the  apostle  says  he  wills  and,  does 
not^  and  hy  the  evil  which  he  says  he  wills  not  and  doeSy 
the  ancients  understand  only  the  notindulging  in  concu- 
PTSCENCK,  and  the  indulging  in  it ;  while  the  moder  ns  un- 
derstand GOOD  a?2d  evil  actually  performed.  2.  That 
such  was  the  opinion  of  the  ancients  is  proved  by  cita- 
tions from  Epiphanius.,  Augustine^  Bede^  and  Thomas 
Aquinas.  3.  The  difference  between  these  two  diverse  ex- 
planations of  good  and  evil  is  so  great^  in  the  judgment 
of  the  ancients.,  that.,  according  to  both  explanations.,  they 
cannot  agree  with  a  regenerate  man.  This  is  pri  ved  by 
citations  fiom  Augustine^  Bede.^  Thomas  Aquinas^  and 
Hugh  the  cardinal. 

Thesis. — ^The  meaning  which  the  greater  part  of  our  modem 


4» 

DISSERTATION. 

divines  ascribe  to  the  apostle  in  tiiis  chapter,  is  not  approved 
by  any  ut*  tlie  ancient  doctors  of  the  church,  not  even  by  Au- 
gnstiucj  liiuiselt';  but  by  many  of  them,  it  was  repudiated  and 
rejected. 

In  this  thesis,  I  do  not  assert  that  none  of  the  ancient  doc- 
tors has  interpreted  this  chapter  as  relating  to  a  man  who  is 
regenerate  and  placed  under  grace  ;.  for  I  have  already  con- 
fessed that  St.  Augustine  and  some  others  give  it  that  inter- 
pretation.   But  I  athrni  that  the  interpretation  of  our  divines 
differs  from  the  explanation  of  those  ancients  in  a  p(^int  of 
great  moment ;  and  so  great  is  this  difference,  that,  except 
by  a  forced  construction  and  a  meaning  contrary  to  the  mind 
of  those  old  authors  themselves,  the  moderns  are  unable  to 
contirm  their  opinion  on  this  subject  by  tiie  autfiority  of  the 
aiicients.    This  will,  I  think,  be  proved  w4th  suthcient  accu- 
racy, if  it  be  shewn  that  tliose  things  which  the  apostle  at- 
tributes to  this  man,  are  received  by  uur  divines  in  a  widely 
different  acceptation  from  that  in  which  they  were  understood 
by  those  among  the  ancients 'who  explained  the  chapter  as 
relating  to  a  man  under  grace.    Indeed  the  moderns  receive 
it  in  a  sense  so  ftr  different  and  dissenting  from  this  explan- 
ation of  some  of  the  ancients,  that  these  veiy  ancients  have 
entertained  the  opinion  that  these  attributes,  [in  iiom.  vii,] 
when  received  according  to  their  modern  coUhtiuction  by  our 
divines,  do  not  agree  witli  a  man  who  is  regenerate  and  undtr 
gy€L''e^  but  with  one.  who  is  placed  undtv  the  law. 

Tlie  truth  of  this  affirmation  I  will  now  proceed  to  point  out 
in  the  following  manner :  That  good  which  the  apostle  saya 
he  indeed  wills  but  does  not,  and  that  evil  which,  he  says,  he 
wills  not  and  yet  does,  are  interpreted  by  most  of  our  divines 
as  retl^rring  to  actual  good  and  evil.  And  they  explain  tlie 
EVIL  by  that  very  deed  which  is  committed,  with  the  consent 
of  the  will,  through  the  lusting  ot  the  flesh  against  the  lusting 
of  the  Spirit;  in  like  manner,  they  explain  the  good  by  that 
very  deed  which  a  man  indeed  lusts  or  desires  to  do  accord- 
ing to  the  Spirit,  but  which  he  does  not  actually  periorui,  be- 
ing hindered  by  the  lusting  of  the  flesh.    Let  the  cumiijenta- 


406 


JAMES  ABMINIUS 


ries  of  our  divines  be  examined,  and  it  will  at  once  be  evident 
that  this  is  their  interpretation  of  the  chapter  ;  and  this  is  open- 
ly declared  hy  those  who,  on  this  subject,  are  opposed  to  me 
in  opinion. 

But  when  St.  Augustine,  and  all  those  ancients  whom  I  have 
had  an  opportunity  of  perusing,  interpret  this  chapter  as  refer- 
ring to  a  man  who  is  regenerate  and  placed  under  grace,  they 
assert  that  the  evil  which  the  apostle  says  he  would  not,  but 
did,  is  to  lust  or  desire  ;  but  they  interpret  the  good  which  he 
says  he  would,  but  did  not,  by  not  lusting  or  coveting ;  yet 
they  make  a  distinction  between  these  two — lustitig  and  going 
after  their  lusts — and  not  lusting  and  not  going  after  their 
lusts.  In  a  manner  nearly  similar,  the  apostle  St.  James  de- 
notes this  difference  in  his  epistle,  i,  14,  15  :  "  But  every  man 
is  tempted,  when  he  is  drawn  away  of  his  own  lust,  and  enti- 
ced. Then  when  lust  hath  conceived,  it  bringeth  forth  sin," 
that  is,  actual  sin  ;  "  and  sin,  when  it  is  finished,  bringeth 
forth  death." 

That  this  was  the  meaning  of  the  ancients,  is  proved  by 

1.  EPIPHANIUS. 

For,  that  which  is  said,  "  What  I  do  I  allow  not,  but  what 
I  hate  that  I  do,"  must  not  be  received  concerning  that  evil 
which  we  have  performed  and  completed,  but  concerning  that 
about  which  we  have  only  thought.  {Heresy  64^A,  against 
Origen^  lib.  2,  torn.  2.) 

Otherwise,  how  should  the  apostle  have  indeed  chiefly  done 
the  evil  which  displeased  him,  but  not  the  good  which  was 
pleasing,  if  he  had  not  spoken  about  extraneous  thoughts, 
which  we  have  occasionally  thought,  and  not  willing  them, 
not  knowing  from  what  cause  they  arise  ?  {Ihid.) 

For  this  good  is  perfect,  not  only  to  abstain  from  doing,  but 
likewise  from  thinking ;  and  the  good  is  not  done  which  we 
will,  but  the  evil  which  we  will  not.  {Ihid.) 

"Wherefore,  this  is  placed  within  us :  to  will,  that  we  will 
not  think  about  these  things.  Yet  this  is  not  placed  within 
us :  to  gain  our  end,  that  they  be  dispersed  so  as  not  to  return 


DISSERTATION. 


407 


again  to  our  minds,  but  only  that  we  may  in  some  degree  use 
them,  or  not  use  them — as  is  the  sentiment  in  the  subsequent 
passage :  "  For  the  good  that  I  would  I  do  not for  I 
will  not  to  think  on  those  things  which  hurt  me,  because 
this  is  a  good  and  immaculate  employment,  and  devoid  of 
reprehension,  according  to  the  common  saying,  [in  refer- 
ence to  another  affair,]  "  a  square  may  be  formed  either 
in  the  mind,  or  by  the  hands,  without  any  blame."  There- 
fore, "  the  good  that  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil  which  I 
would  not,  that  I  do  ;"  I  will  not  to  think,  and  yet  I  think  on 
those  things  which  I  will  not.  (Ihid.) 

In  a  subsequent  passage,  when  refuting  those  who  interpret- 
ed this  passage  as  descriptive  of  the  deeds  performed  by  the 
apostle  himself,  his  words  are  : 

But  now,  if  any  venture  to  dispute  these  words  by  object- 
ing, "  The  apostle  teaches  us  this,  by  these  words — For  the 
good  that  I  would^  I  do  not  /  hut  the  evil  which  I  would  noty 
that  I  do — that  they  are  to  be  referred  not  only  to  our  thinh- 
ing  evil  m  our  minds  from  which  we  are  averse  and  which 
we  avoid,  but  likewise  to  our  actually  doing  and  performing 
evil,"  we  therefore  request  the  man  who  reasons  thus,  if  what 
he  says  be  correct,  to  explain  to  us  what  that  evil  was  which, 
though  the  apostle  hated  and  nilled  to  do,  yet  he  did  it.  Or, 
on  the  contrary,  let  him  inform  us  what  good  that  was  which, 
he  willed  greatly  to  perform,  but  which  he  was  not  able  to  do, 
&c.  {Ihid.) 

Consult  the  remaining  portion  of  this  passage. 

2.  AUGUSTINE. 

And  it  follows,  "  I  find  then  a  law,  that  when  I  would  do 
good,  evil  is  present  with  me that  is,  I  find  a  law  to  be  with- 
in me  when  I  will  to  do  the  good  which  the  law  wills ;  be- 
cause "evil  is  present,"  not  with  the  law  itself  which  says, 
"  Thou  shalt  not  covet"  or  lust,  but  "  evil  is  present  with  me," 
because  I  likewise  unwillingly  lust.  {On  Marriage  and  Con- 
cupiscence^ cap.  30,  to7n.  7.) 


408 


JAMES  ARMINIU8. 


To  "  the  body  of  this  death,"  therefore,  is  understood  to  be- 
long, that  another  hiw  in  the  nieuihers  wages  war  indeed 
againtit  the  law  of  the  mind  while  the  desh  histeth  against 
the  Spirit,  although  it  does  not  subjugate  the  ujind,  because 
the  Sj)irit  also  lusteth  against  the  flesh  ;  and  thus,  tiiough  the 
law  of  siti  itself  holds  some  pai't  of  the  fljsli  in  captivity,  by 
which  it  may  resist  the  law  of  the  mind,  yet  it  does  not  reiga 
in  our  bo<ly,  though  it  be  mortal,  if  we  do  not  obey  it  in  the 
lusts  thereof.    {Ihld.  cap.  3 J.) 

But  the  apostle  su!)j«Mns  this  expression  :  "  So,  then,  with 
tlie  mind  I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God  ;  but  with  the  flesh, 
the  law  of  sin,"  which  must  be  understood  in  this  manner: 
With  my  mind  I  serve  the  law  of  G-od,  hij  not  consenting  to 
the  law  of  sin  ;  hut  with  the  flesh,  I  serve  the  law  of  sin  by 
haoing  desires  of  sin,  to  which,  thi)ugh  l4o  not  yield  my  coa- 
seiit,  yet  I  am  not  totally  free  from  them."  {Ibid.) 

Or  })erliaps  we  are  alraid  of  those  words  which  follow: 
"  For  that  which  I  do,  I  allow  not ;  for  what  I  would  that  do 
I  not ;  but  what  1  hiite,  that  do  I."    Are  we  afraid  that,  from 
these  worvls,  any  one  should  suspect  the  apostle  of  consenting 
to  the  concupiscence  of  the  flesh  to  evil  works?    But  we  must 
take  into  our  consideration  that  which  the  apostle  immediate- 
ly subjoins  :     It^  then,  I  do  that  which  I  would  not,  I  consent 
UMto  the  law  that  it  s  gooJ."    For  he  here  says  that  lie  con- 
sents to  the  law  more  than  to  the  concupiscence  of  the  flesh  ; 
because  he  bestows  on  this  latter  the  appellation  of  '^sin." 
Tiiereforo,  he  said  that  he  does  and  performs  not  with  an  \af' 
fecta]  inclination  of  consenting  and  fulriUing,  but  with  the 
very  uKjtion  of  lusting  or  coveting.    Hence,  therefore,  he 
Bays,  "  I  consent  to  the  law  that  it  is  good."      I  consent,"  be- 
cause I  nill  what  it  does  not  will.    lie  afterwards  says,  Kow 
it  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,  but  sin  thatdwelleth  in  me."  "What 
does  this  mean— Now  then," — except  that  he  is  now  under 
grace,  which  has  delivered  the  delighting  of  the  will  from 
consenting  with  lust?    Neither  is  the  other  part  of  the  clause 
any  better  understoo  1  :     It  is  no  more  I  that  do  it,"  than  tliat 
be  doe ^  not  now  consent  to     yield  his  members  as  instru- 
ments of  unrighteousness  to  sin."    For  if  be  both  lusts,  and 


1 


DISSERTATION. 


409 


consents,  and  performs,  how  is  it  "  no  more  he  that  does  it," 
though  he  is  grieved  at  his  doing  it,  and  grievously  groans  on 
ac3connt  of  having  been  conquered  ?  {Against  the  two  Epis- 
tles of  the  Pelagians^  cap.  10.) 

For  this  is  to  perform  that  which  is  good,"  that  a  man  do 
not  indulge  in  concupiscence  or  lust.  But  this  good  is  imper- 
fect when  the  man  lusts,  though  he  does  not  consent  to  con- 
cupiscence for  evil.  {IMd.') 

And  from  these  things  he  afterwards  concludes — "  So,  then, 
with  the  mind,  I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God,  but  with  the 
flesh,  the  law  of  sin,"  that  is,  "  with  the  flesh,  the  law  of  sin" 
by  indulging  in  concupiscence,  "  but  with  the  mind,  the  law 
of  God"  by  not  consenting  to  such  concupiscence.  {Ibid.) 

He  does  not  say,  how  to  do  or  to  perform^  but  "  how  to 
fulfill  or  complete  that  which  is  good  ;"  because  to  perform 
or  to  do  what  is  good,  is,  not  to  go  after  lusts ;  but  to  fulfill 
or  to  perfect  what  is  good,  is  not  to  lust  or  to  indulge  in  con- 
cupiscence. That,  therefore,  which  is  said  to  the  Galatians, 
(v,  16,)  "  ye  shall  not  fulfill  or  perfect  the  lusts  of  the  flesh," 
is  said  about  a  contrary  object  in  this  passage  of  the  epistle  to 
the  Romans — "  but  how  to  fulfill  or  perfect  that  which  is  good, 
I  find  not."  Because  those  lusts  are  not  perfected  or  fulfilled 
in  evil,  when  the  assent  ot  our  will  is  not  added  to  them  ;  nor 
is  our  will  perfected  or  fulfilled  in  good,  so  long  as  the  motion 
of  those  lusts  continues,  though  we  do  not  consent  to  such  mo- 
tion. But  this  conflict,  in  which  even  those  who  are  baptized 
struggle  as  in  an  agony,  when  "  the  flesh  lusteth  against  the 
Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against  the  flesh,"  in  which  the  Spirit 
also  does  or  performs  a  good  work,  by  not  consenting  to  evil 
concupiscence  ;  but  it  does  noi  fulfill  or  perfect  such  work, 
because  it  does  not  consume  or  remove  those  evil  desires  or 
lusts.  .The  flesh,  likewise,  does  or  performs  an  evil  desire ; 
but  it  does  not  fulfill  or  perfect  it,  because,  the  Spirit  not  con- 
senting to  it,  the  flesh  also  does  not  \^pervenit'\  come  so  far  as 
to  the  condemned  works.  This  conflict,  therefore,  is  not  that 
of  the  Jews  nor  of  any  other  description  of  men  whatsoever, 
but  it  is  evidently  that  of  Christian  believei's,  and  of  those  who 
live  good  lives  and  labor  hard  in  this  contest,  as  is  briefly 
27  Tox..  u. 


i 


410 


JAMES  AKMDTIUS. 


shewn  by  the  apostle,  in  Eomans  vii,  25,  where  lie  says,  "  So, 
then,  with  the  mind,  I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God  ;  but  with 
the  flesh  the  law  of  sin."  {Against  Julian  the  Pelagian^  lib. 
l.cap.  26.) 

Be  unwilling,  therefore,  to  do  that  which  you  are  not  will- 
ing to  suffer ;  and  do  not  say,  that  we  allure  you  to  sweet 
deeds,  about  which  we  cite  the  apostle  as  thus  declaring  him- 
self:  "  For  I  know  that  in  me,  (that  is,  in  my  flesh,)  dwelleth 
no  good  thing."  For,  though  "  they  do  not  perfect  or  fulfill 
the  good  which  they  would"  in  not  indulging  in  concupiscence ; 
yet  they  do  or  perform  good,  in  not  going  after  their  lusts. 
{Ibid.  lib.  5,  cap.  5.) 

Be  it  far  from  us,  therefore,  to  assert  what  you  pretend,  that 
we  affirm  that,  "  the  apostle  spake  these  words  as  though  he 
was  desirous  to  be  understood  by  them,  that  he  was  in  the  act 
of  fornication,  struggling  hard  against  it,  whilst  he  was  led 
away  by  some  hand  of  a  pestiferous  voluptuousness,"  when 
the  apostle  himself  says.  It  i,^  no  more  I  that  doit;  thus 
shewing  that  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  did  work  only  a  libidi- 
nous impulse  without  a  consent  to  the  sin.  {Ibid.  lib.  6, 
cap.  11.) 

He  likewise  refrains  himself  from  every  evil  thing,  who  has 
sin  which  he  does  not  suffer  to  reign  within  him,  and  into 
whom  secretly  creeps  a  reprehensible  thought  which  he  does 
not  permit  to  arrive  at  the  end  [intended]  of  a  deed  or  per- 
formance. But  it  is  one  thing  not  to  have  sin,  and  it  is  an- 
other not  to  obey  its  desires  or  lusts.  It  is  one  thing  to  fulfil 
that  which  is  commanded,  "  Thou  shalt  not  covet  or  lust," 
and  it  is  another  at  least,  by  a  certain  attempt  at  abstinencey 
to  do  that  which  is  also  written :  "  Thou  shalt  not  go  after  thy 
lusts."  Yet  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  know  any  of  these  things 
correctly,  without  the  grace  of  the  Savior.  To  do  or  perform 
righteousness,  therefore,  in  the  true  worship  of  God,  is  to  fight 
by  an  internal  conflict  against  the  inward  evil  of  concupiscence, 
and  not  at  all  to  have,  to  perfect,  or  fulfill  [adversarium]  that 
which  is  its  opposite.  For  he  who  fights,  is  still  not  only  in 
great  peril,  but  is  also  sometimes  smitten,  though  he  is  not 
utterly  cast  down.    But  he  who  has  no  adversary,  rejoices  in 


DISSERTATION. 


411 


full  peace  and  tranquillity.  He  also  is  most  truly  said  to  be 
without  sin,  in  whom  no  sin  dwells,  but  not  he,  who,  through 
abstaining  from  an  evil  work,  says,  "  It  is  no  more  I  that  do 
it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me."  {On  Nature  and  Grace^ 
cwp,  62.) 

Therefore,  the  apostle  "  does  that  which  he  would  not,"  be- 
cause he  wills  not  to  lust  or  indulge  in  concupiscence,  and  yet 
he  lusts  ;  therefore,  "  he  does  that  which  he  would  not."  Did 
that  evil  concupiscence  draw  the  apostle  into  subjection  to 
concupiscence  to  commit  fornication  ?  Far  from  it.  Let  not 
such  a  thought  as  this  arise  in  our  hearts.  He  struggled  hard, 
and  was  not  subdued.  But  because  he  was  unwilling  also  to 
have  this  against  which  he  was  struggling,  therefore,  he  said, 
/'  I  do  that  which  I  would  not ;"  I  am  unwilling  to  indulge  in 
concupiscence,  and  yet  I  lust.  Therefore,  "  I  do  that  which  I 
would  not,"  but  yet  I  no  not  consent  to  concupiscence.  For 
otherwise  he  would  not  have  said,  "Ye  shall  not  fulfill  the 
lusts  of  the  flesh,"  if  he  himself  fulfilled  them.  {On  Time^ 
Sermon  55,  torn,  10.) 

How  do  I  perform  that  which  is  good,  and  not  perfect 
what  is  good  ?  I  do  or  perform^  good,  when  I  do  not  consent 
to  evil  concupiscence  ;  but  I  do  not  perfect  or  fulfill  what  is 
good,  in  not  entirely  refraining  from  concupiscence.  Again, 
therefore,  how  does  my  enemy  perform  that  which  is  evil, 
and  not  perfect  what  is  evil  ?  He  does  or  performs  evil,  be- 
cause he  moves  an  evil  desire  ;  and  he  does  not  perfect  what 
is  evil,  because  he  does  not  draw  me  to  evil.  {Ibid.) 

"  With  the  mind,  I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God,"  by  not 
consenting,  "  but  with  the  flesh,  the  law  of  sin,"  by  not  indul- 
ging in  concupiscence.  {Ihid.) 

Hence,  also  this  expression,  "  I  do  that  which  I  would  not ;" 
"  for  the  flesh  lusteth  against  the  Spirit,"  and  I  am  unwilling 
that  it  should  lust.  I  account  it  a  great  matter  if  I  do  not  con- 
sent, for  I  wish  to  abstain  from  it ;  therefore,  "  I  do  that  which 
I  would  not."  For  I  will  that  the  flesh  lust  not  against  the 
Spirit,  and  I  am  unable  ;  this  is  what  I  have  said,  "  I  do  that 
which  I  would  not."  {Sermon  ISth^  on  the  Woj^ds  of  the 
Apostle.) 


412 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


If,  therefore,  "  the  flesh  lusteth  against  the  Spirit,"  that  in 
this  very  thing  you  do  not  what  you  would,  because  you  will 
not  to  indulge  in  concupiscence  and  are  not  able,  [to  refrain 
from  such  indulgence,]  at  least  hold  thy  will  in  the  grace  of 
the  Lord,  and  persevere  by  its  assistance.  Repeat  beibre  him 
that  which  you  have  sung,  "  Direct  my  steps  according  to  thy 
word  ;  and  let  not  any  iniquity  have  dominion  over  me." 
(Psalm  cxix,  133.)  What  is  this,  "  Let  not  any  iniquity  have 
dominion  over  me"?  Listen  to  the  apostle :  "  Let  not  sin 
reign  in  your  mortal  body."  "What  is  this  reigning  ?  "  By 
obeying  it  in  the  lusts  thereof."  He  has  not  said,  Do  not  have 
evil  desires.  For  how  have  I  not  evil  desires  "  in  this  mortal 
body,"  in  which  "  the  flesh  lusts  against  the  Spirit,  and  the 
Spirit  against  the  flesh"  ?  This  thing,  therefore,  "  Let  not  sin 
reign,"  &c.  {Ihid.) 

3.     VENERABLE  BEDE. 

But  if  it  be  himself,  (that  is,  the  apostle,)  let  us  not  so  un- 
derstand that  which  he  has  said  :  "  "What  I  would,  that  do  I 
not,  but  what  I  hate,  that  I  do  ;"  as  if  he  willed  to  be  chaste 
and  yet  was  an  adulterer,  or  willed  to  be  merciful  and  was 
cruel,  or  willed  to  be  pious  and  was  impious.  But  what  are 
we  to  understand  ?  I  will  not  to  indulge  in  concupiscence, 
and  yet  I  do  indulge  in  it.    {On  Romans  vii.) 

Though  I  do  not  consent  to  concupiscence,  and  though  I 
do  not  go  after  my  lusts,  yet  I  still  indulge  in  concupis- 
cence. {Ihid) 

What  is  it  that  /  hate  f  To  indulge  in  concupiscence  :  I 
hate  to  indulge  in  concupiscence,  and  yet  I  do  so  from  my 
flesh  and  not  from  my  mind.  {Ihid.) 

But  that  which  I  do^  is  to  indulge  in  concupiscence,  not  to 
consent  to  it ;  that  no  one  may  now  seek  in  the  apostle  an  ex- 
ample for  himself  of  sinning,  and  afibrd  a  bad  example. 
"  What  I  would,  that  do  I  not."  Fcr  what  says  the  law  ? 
"Thou  shalt  not  lust  or  covet."  And  I  would  not  lust,  and 
jet  I  do  lust,  although  I  do  not  yield  up  my  consent  to  concu> 
piscence,  and  though  I  do  not  go  after  it.   For  I  offer  resist- 


DKSERTATIOir. 


4:13 


anc9, 1  tarn  away  ray  mind,  I  give  a  denial  to  the  instruments, 
I  repress  my  members  ;  and  yet  that  is  done  within  me  which 
I  will  not.  That  which  the  law  likewise  wills  not,  I  nill  with 
the  law.  What  it  would  not,  that  I  would  not.  Therefore, 
"  I  consent  to  the  law."  I  am  in  the  flesh,  I  am  in  the  mind  ; 
but  I  am  more  in  the  mind  than  in  the  flesh.  Because,  when 
I  am  in  the  mind,  I  am  in  that  which  governs  ;  for  the  mind 
governs  ;  the  flesh  is  governed.  •  And  I  am  more  in  that  by 
which  I  rule  or  govern,  than  in  that  by  which  I  am  governed. 
Therefore,  I  rule  more  in  the  mind.  {Ibid) 

4.     THOMAS  AQTHNAS. 

To  will  is  present  with  me,]  that  is,  to  me  who  am  now 
recovered  by  grace.  It  is  through  the  operation  of  divine 
grace,  by  which  indeed  I  not  only  will  that  which  is  good,  but 
I  also  perform  something  that  is  good,  because  I  offer  resist- 
ance to  concupiscence,  and  uncer  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit, 
I  act  against  it.  But  I  do  not  find  in  my  power  the  manner 
in  which  I  may  perform  that  which  is  good,  that  is,  in 
order  entirely  to  exclude  concupiscence.  {Oti  Ro?nans  vii.) 

3.  But  these  two  explanations  of  those  attributes  are,  in 
the  judgment  of  those  very  ancients  who  have  explained 
this  chapter  as  relating  to  a  regenerate  man,  so  vastly  diverse 
and  dissentient,  that  the  same  things  cannot  agree  with  a 
regenerate  man  according  to  both  these  explanations ;  nay, 
that,  according  to  the  first  of  these  explanations,  they  can 
agree  with  a  regenerate  man^  but  according  to  the  second 
they  can  agree  only  with  a  man  who  is  under  sin  and 
under  the  law.  This  I  will  now  proceed  to  prove  from  the 
testimonies  of  those  ancients  themselves  : 

1.  AUGUSTINE. 

For  in  no  bettf^r  manner  is  this  understood — "/if  is  no 
more  I  that  do  if — than  that  he  does  not  consent  "to  yield 
his  members  as  instruments  of  unrighteousness  unto  sin." 
Foi'  if  he  both  lusts,  and  consents,  and  does,  how  is  it  "  no  more 


14 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


he  that  does  it,'-  though  he  is  grieved  that  he  does  it,  and 
groans  grievously  at  being  conquered  ?  {Against  th$  two 
Epistles  of  the  Pelagians^  lib.  1,  cap.  10.) 

On  two  of  these  three  passages  we  have  before  dispu- 
ted, and  which  saj,  "  But  I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin 
And  this  is  the  third  :  " — bringing  me  into  captivity  to  the 
law  of  sin  which  is  in  my  members."  On  account  of  all 
the  three,  the  apostle  may  seem  to  be  describing  him  who 
is  still  living  under  the  law,  and  not  yet  under  grace.  But 
as  we  have  already  expounded  the  two  former  of  them  to 
be  spoken  in  reference  to  tbe  flesh  which  is  yet  corruptible, 
so  may  this  third  passage  likewise  be  understood ;  as  if  it 
said  that  I  was  brought  into  captivity  by  the  flesh  not  by  the 
mind,  by  motion  not  by  consent ;  and  that  it  therefore  brought  ^ 
me  into  captivity,  because  in  my  flesh  itself  there  is  no  other 
than  our  common  [sinful]  nature.  {Ihid.) 

He  is  spiritual  because  he  lives  according  to  the  Spirit; 
but  still,  on  the  part  of  mortal  flesh,  the  same  man  is  spirit- 
ual and  carnal.  Behold  the  spiritual  man  :  "With  the  mind 
I  myself  serve  the  law  of  God."  Behold  the  carnal  man : 
"  But  with  the  flesh  I  serve  the  law  of  sin."  Is,  then,  this 
same  man  both  spiritual  and  carnal  ?  He  is  evidently  so,  as 
long  as  he  is  a  dweller  on  earth.  Whosoever  thou  art,  be 
not  surprised' if  thou  yieldest  and  consentest  to  any  lusts  what- 
soever, since  thou  either  supposest  them  to  be  good  for  fulfill- 
ing libidinous  excess,  or  thou  undoubtedly  seest  them  now  to 
be  so  evil,  that  yet  by  yielding  to  them  thou  consentest,  and 
followest  whither  they  lead,  and  dost  perpetrate  those  things 
which  they  wickedly  suggest ;  -thou  art  entirely  carnal,  who- 
soever thou  art  that  dost  correspond  with  this  description — 
thou  art  totally  carnal.  But  if  indeed  thou  lustest  or  desirest 
that  which  the  law  forbids  when  it  says  :  "  Thou  shalt  not 
covet,"  yet  if  thou  dost  also  observe  that  other  thing  which  the 
law  likewise  says,  "  Thou  shalt  not'  go  after  thy  lusts,"  in  thy 
mind  thou  art  spiritual,  and  in  thy  flesh  carnal.  For  it  is  one 
thing,  not  to  lust  or  not  to  indulge  in  concupiscence ;  and  it  is 
anothei',  not  to  go  after  its  lusts.  The  nonindulgence  in  con- 
cupiscence is  the  property  of  one  who  is  entirely  perfect ;  not 


DISSERTATION. 


415 


to  go  after  his  lusts,  is  that  of  one  who  is  fighting,  engaged  in 
a  straggle,  and  laboring.  Let  me  be  allowed,  likewise,  to  add , 
what  the  thing  itself  requires,  that  it  is  also  the  property  of 
him  who  does  not  walk  after  liis  lusts ;  it  is  the  property  of 
a  man  who  is  conquering  and  overcoming.  For  the  first 
of  these  [the  nonindulgence  in  concupiscence]  is  obtained  by 
the  battle,  the  struggle  and  the  labor,  but  not  till  after  the  vic- 
tory has  been  secured.  (O/i  the  Words  of  the  Apostle^  Ser- 
mon 5.) 

It  is  apparent,  therefore,  from  the  mind  of  St.  Augustine, 
that,  if  this  chapter  be  explained  as  relating  to  consent  and  to 
the  actual  perpetration  of  evil,  it  can  by  no  means  be  under, 
stood  concerning  a  regenerate  man,  but  concerning  a  man  who 
is  under  the  law,  and  "is  merely  carnal,"  as  he  expresses  him- 
self. 

2.  VENERABLE  BEDE. 

We  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual.']  There  is,  therefore, 
perhaps,  some  other ;  probably  thou  art  the  man ;  either  thou 
art  he,  or  I  am.  If,  then,  he  be  some  one  of  us,  let  us  listen  to 
him  about  himself,  and,  not  being  ofi*ended,  let  us  correct  our- 
selves. But  if  it  be  himself,  (that  is,  the  apostle,)  let  us  not  so 
understand  that  which  he  has  said :  "  What  I  would,  that  do 
I  not ;  but  what  I  hate,  that  I  do as  if  it  was  his  will  to  be 
chaste  and  yet  he  was  an  adulterer,  or  to  be  merciful  and  yet 
was  cruel,  or  to  be  pious  and  yet  was  impious.  But  what  are 
we  to  understand  ?  My  will  is,  not  to  indulge  in  concupiscence  \ 
and  yet  I  do  indulge  in  it.  {On  Romans  vii.) 

3.  THOMAS  AQUINAS. 

Of  all  these  writers,  Thomas  Aquinas  most  plainly  places 
the  two  explanations  in  opposition  to  each  other ;  and  he  de- 
clares that  the  things  which  are  in  this  chapter  attributed  by 
the  apostle  to  the  man  about  whom  he  is  treating,  according 
to  one  of  these  explanations  agree  with  a  regenerate  man,  but 


416 


JAMES  ARMmiUS. 


according  to  the  other  thej  agree  with  a  man  who  is  under 
sin : 

Man,  therefore,  is  said  to  be  carnal,  beca\3se  his  reason  is 
carnal.  It  is  called  "carnal"  on  two  accounts;  On  the  first, 
because  when  the  reason  consents  to  those  things  to  which  it 
is  instigated  bj  the  flesh,  it  is  brought  into  subjection  to  the 
flesh,  according  to  the  declaration  in  1  Cor.  iii,  3 :  "  For, 
whereas  there  is  among  jou  envying,  and  strife,  and  divisions, 
are  ye  not  carnal  ?"  In  this  manner,  it  is  also  understood  about 
a  man  not  yet  restored  by  grace.  On  the  second  account, 
reason  is  said  to  be  carnal  from  the  circumstance  of  its  being 
attacked  by  the  flesh  according  to  that  declaration  in  Gal. 
V,  lY,  "  The  flesh  lusteth  against  the  Spirit."  And,  in  this 
manner,  the  reason  even  of  a  man  who  is  placed  under  grace 
is  understood  to  be  carnal.  But  both  these  carnalities  proceed 
from  sin,  &c. 

Hence  he  says,  "For  that  which  I  do  I  understand  not," 
[or  "allow  not,"]  that  is,  that  it  ought  to  be  performed.  This 
may  indeed  be  understood  in  two  ways :  In  the  one  mode,  it 
may  be  understood  concerning  him  who  is  subjected  to  sin, 
who  knows  in  general  that  sin  must  not  be  committed,  yet, 
being  conquered,  by  the  suggestion  of  the  devil,  or  by  passion, 
or  by  the  inclination  of  a  perverse  habit,  he  commits  it,  and 
is,  therefore,  said  to  perform  that  which  he  understands  ouglit 
not  to  be  performed,  doing  this  against  his  conscience,  as  it  is 
said  in  Luke  xii,  47,  "That  servant,  who  knew  his  Lord's  will, 
and  did  not  according  to  his  will,  shall  deservedly  be  beaten 
with  many  stripes."  In  the  other  mode,  it  may  be  understood 
concerning  him  who  is  placed  in  grace,  who  indeed  does  that 
which  is  evil ;  not  indeed  by  executing  it  in  operation  or  with 
a  consenting  mind,  but  only  by  indulging  in  concupiscence 
according  to  [passtonem]  the  feeling  of  the  sensual  appetite. 


♦Anuinius  has  the  following  marginal  note  on  this  passage:  " This  [w)toWo]  argument 
deduced  from  the  supposed  original  signification  of  the  word  is  absurd ;  nor  is  it  to  be  endured 
that '  reason  is  called  carnal  because  it  is  attacked  by  the  flesh.'  For,  according  to  this  mode 
of  Hrgumentation,  St.  Paul  will  be  diabolical  because  he  was  assaulted  by  the  devtV^ 


DISSERTATION. 


417 


And  that  concupiscence  is  on  account  of  the  reason  and  the 
understanding,  because  it  precedes  his  judgment,  at  the  ap- 
proach of  which  such  an  actual  operation  is  hindered,  &c. 

First,  therefore,  he  says,  in  reference  to  the  omission  ot 
good,  "for  the  good  which  it  is  my  will  to  do,  I  do  not."  This 
may  indeed  be  understood,  in  one  mode,  about  a  man  who  is 
placed  under  sin ;  and  thus  that  which  he  says  in  this  place, 
"I  do,"  must  be  received  according- to  a  complete  act,  which 
is  exercised  externally,  through  the  consent  of  reason.  But 
when  he  says,  "It  is  my  will,"  it  must  be  understood  not 
indeed  in  reference  to  a  complete  will  which  is  preceptive  of 
a  work  or  operation,  but  in  reference  to  a  certain  incomplete 
will,  by  which  men  will  in  general  that  which  is  good,  as  they 
also  have  in  general  a  correct  judgment  concerning  one  thing ; 
and  such  a  will  is  corrupted  in  particular,  because  it  does  not 
what  it  understands  in  general  ought  to  be  done,  and  that 
which  it  wills  to  do.  But  according^  to  its  beinoj  understood 
respecting  a  man  recovered  by  grace,  we  must,  on  the  con- 
trary, understand  by  this  which  he  says,  "  It  is  my  will,"  a 
complete  will  continuing  throughout  in  the  election  or  choice 
of  a  particular  operation,  that  by  this  which  he  says,  "I  do," 
may  be  understood  an  incomplete  act  which  consists  only  in 
the  sensual  appetite,  and  does  not  extend  to  the  consent  of 
reason.  For  a  man  who  is  placed  under  grace,  vnlls  indeed 
to  preserve  his  mind  from  corrupt  lusts  ;  but  he  does  not  per- 
form this  good,  because  of  the  inordinate  motions  of  concu- 
piscence which  rise  up  in  his  sensual  appetite.  Similar  to 
this  is  what  he  says  in  Gal.  v,  17,  "so  that  ye  do  not  the  things 
which  ye  would." 

Secondly,  he  subjoins,  in  reference  to  the  perpetration  of 
evil,  "  But  the  evil  which  I  hate,  that  I  do."  If  this  be  indeed 
understood  concerning  a  man  who  is  a  sinner,  then  by  this 
which  is  said,  "I  hate,"  is  understood  a  certain  imperfect 
hatred,  according  to  which  every  man  naturally  hates  evil. 
But  by  this  which  he  says,  "  I  do,"  is  understood  an  act  per- 
fected by  the  execution  of  a  work  according  to  the  consent  of 
reason  ;  for  that  hatred  in  general  is  taken  away  in  a  particu- 
lar which  is  eligible  through  the  inclination  of  a  habit  or  pas- 


418 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


sion.  But  if  it  be  understood  concerning  a  man  placed  under 
grace,  then  by  this  which  he  sajs,  "  I  do,"  is,  on  the  contrary, 
understood  an  imperfect  act,  which  consists  solely  in  the  con- 
cupiscence of  the  sensual  appetite ;  and  by  this  which  he  says, 
"I  hate,"  is  understood  a  perfect  hatred,  by  which  any  one 
perseveres  in  the  detestation  of  evil,  until  the  final  reprobation 
of  it,  &c. 

But  the  law  of  sin  brings  a  man"  into  captivity  in  two  ways: 
By  the  one  mode,  through  consent  and  operation,  it  captivates 
a  man  who  is  a  sinner ;  by  the  other  mode,  it  captivates  a 
man  placed  under  grace,  with  respect  to  the  motion  of  concu- 
piscence.. 

Grace  delivers  from  the  body  of  this  death  in  two  ways : 
By  the  one  mode,  that  the  corruption  ol  the  body  may  not 
have  the  dominion  over  the  mind,  drawing  it  to  commit  sin  ; 
by  the  other  mode,  that  the  corruption  of  the  i^ody  may  be 
totally  removed.  Therefore,  with  respect  to  the  first,  it 
appertains  to  the  sinner  to  say,  "  Grace  has  delivered  me  from 
f  he  lody  of  this  death^  that  is,  it  has  delivered  me  from  sin, 
into  which  my  soul  was  led  through  the  corruption  of  the 
body."  But  from  sin  a  righteous  man  has  been  already  de- 
livered ;  wherefore  it  belongs  to  him  to  say,  "  2  he  grace  of 
God  hath  made  me  free  from  the  'body  of  this  death^  that  is, 
that  there  may  not  be  in  my  body  the  corruption  of  sin  or  of 
death,"  which  will  occur  in  the  resurrection. 

Afterwards  when  he  says  "  so  then  with  the  mind  I  myself 
serve  the  law  of  God,"  &c.,  he  infers  a  conclusion,  which  is 
inferred  according  to  these  two  premised  expositions,  in  differ- 
ent ways,  from  the  premises.  For,  according  to  the  exposition 
of  the  preceding  words  in  the  person  of  a  sinner,  the  conclu- 
sion must  be  inferred  thus  :  "  It  has  been  said  that  the  grace 
of  God  hath  made  me  free  from  the  hody  of  this  deaths  that 
I  may  not  be  led  away  by  it  to  sin.  Therefore,  since  I  shall 
now  be  free,  with  the  mind  1  serve  the  law  of  God  ;  hut  with 
the  flesh  1  serve  the  law  of  siu^  which  indeed  remains  in  the 
flesh  with  respect  to  the  fuel,  by  which  the*  flesh  lusts  against 
the  Sjnrit.^^  But  if  the  preceding  words  be  understood  [as 
proceeding]  from  the  person  of  a  righteous  man,  then  the  con* 


DISSERTATION. 


419 


elusion  must  be  thus  inferred:  "The  grace  of  God  through 
Jesus  Christ  hath  made  me  free  from  the  body  of  this  death  ; 
that  is,  so  that  the  corruption  of  sin  and  death  may  not  be 
in  me." 

4.     HUGH  THE  CARDINAL. 

There  is,  therefore,  now  no  condemnation.]  The  preceding 
words  have  been  expounded  concerning  the  captivity  of  mortal 
sin,  under  which  the  man  was  carnally  living ;  and  concerning 
the  captivity  of  venial  sin,  of  the  man  who  is  in  grace.  But 
he  gives  the  appellation  of  "  mortal  sin"  to  that  which  is  ex- 
ercised in  operation  itself,  and  "  venial"  to  that  which  consists 
in  the  act  and  motion  of  lusting  or  indulging  in  concupiscence, 
without  the  consent  of  the  will. 


FIFTH  PART. 

I.     THE  OPPOSITE  OPINION  IS  INJURIOUS  TO  GRACE  AND 
HURTFUL  TO  GOOD  MORALS. 

1.  It  is  FIRST  shewn,  that  the  interpretation  of  Romans  vii, 
which  prevails  in  the  present  day  is  injurious  to  grace,  hy 
attrihuting  to  it  less  than  is  proper.  (1.)  The  contest  which 
is  described  in  that  chapter,  cannot  he  attributed  to  the 
Holy  Spirit  dwelling  in  a  man,  without  manifest  contumely 
to  the  Holy  Ghost.  (2.)  An  objection  and  reply.  2.  It  is 
SECONDLY  shewn,  that  the  modern  interpretation  is  hurtful 
to  good  morals  /  because  it  draws  along  with  it,  as  a  consQ- 
quence,  that  a  man  flatters  and  encourages  himself  in  his 
sins,  provided  only  that  he  commits  them  with  a  reluctant 
conscience.  This  is  illustrated  by  some  instances.  3.  It  is 
likewise  confirmed  by  St.  Augustine  and  by  the  Venerable 
Bede, 

Thesis. — ^The  opinion  which  affirms,  that  this  chapter  treats 
about  a  man  who  is  regenerate  and  placed  under  grace ;  and 


420 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


which  also  interprets  tlie  good  which  this  man  would  and  does 
not,  and  the  evil  which  he  would  not  but  does,  as  referring  to 
actual  good  and  evil;  is  injurious  to  grace,  and  inimical  to 
good  morals. 

1.  That  this  modern  opinion  is  injurious  to  divine  grace,  I 
demonstrate  in  the  following  manner  : 

An  injury  is  inflicted  on  grace,  not  only  by  him  who 
attributes  to  nature  or  to  free  will  that  which  belongs  to  grace, 
that  is,  having  taken  it  away  from  grace ;  but  likewise  by  hira 
who  attributes  to  it  less  than  is  its  due,  and  than  ought  truly 
to  be  ascribed  to  grace.  In  the  last  of  these  modes,  this 
modern  opinion  is  inimical  to  grace :  For  it  attributes  less 
than,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  ought  to  be  ascribed  to 
grace.  The  Scriptures  ascribe  to  divine  grace,  that,  in  the 
regenerate,  it  worketh  not  only  to  will  but  also  to  do  ;  (Phil, 
ii,  13  ;)  that,  by  its  power,  our  old  man  is  crucided,  and  the 
body  of  sin  is  destroyed  or  enervated,  so  that  henceforth  we 
should  not  obey  it  in  the  lusts  thereof ;  that,  through  grace, 
the  regenerate  are  dead  indeed  unto  sin,  and  are  raised  up 
again  to  walk  in  newness  of  life,  in  which  they  serve  not  sin 
but  God,  neither  do  they  yield  their  members  as  instruments 
of  unrighteousness  unto  sin,  but  as  instruments  of  righteousness 
to  God ;  (Rom.  vi,  2-13  ;)  that,  through  the  efficacy  of  the 
Spirit,  they  mortify  the  deeds  of  the  body;  (viii,  13;)  and 
that  grace  not  only  supplies  to  the  regenerate  strength  to  resist 
the  world,  Satan,  and  the  flesh,  but,  likewise,  power  to  gain 
the  victory  over  them.  (Kphes.  vi,  11-18  ;  James  iv,  4-8  ;  1 
John  iv,  4;  v,  4;  &c ,  &c.) 

But  this  modern  opinion  attributes  to  grace,  that  its  only 
efiect  in  the  regenei-ate  is  to  will  and  not  to  do^  that  it  is  too 
weak  to  crucify  the  old  man,  to  destroy  the  body  of  sin,  or  to 
conquer  the  flesh,  the  world  and  Satan.  For  the  regenerate 
man,  according  to  this  opinion,  is  said  to  obey  sin  in  its  lusts, 
and  to  walk  after  the  desires  of  the  flesh  ;  though  he  is  said 
to  do  this,  compelled  by  the  violence  of  sin,  in  opposition  to 
conscience,  and  with  a  reluctant  will.  For  the  interpretation 
and  addition  alter  the  mode  of  obedience  by  which  men  obey 


DISSEliTATION. 


421 


sin  ;  it  does  not  deny  obedienae  itself.  This  was  also  the 
cause  why  St.  Augustine  interpreted  the  chapter  in  reference 
to  concupiscence  ;  for  he  perceived  that  if  he  interpreted  it 
concerning  actual  sins,  he  would  be  inflicting  an  injury  on 
grace. 

(1.)  I  am  desirous  that  it  should  be  made  the  subject  of  dil- 
igent consideration,  and  that  it  should  be  frequently  and  de- 
liberately pondered,  whether  the  contest  which  is  said  to  be 
described  in  this  chapter  can  be  ascribed  to  the  indwelling 
Holy  Spirit,  without  manifest  contumely  and  dishonor  to  the 
grace  of  Christ  and  of  his  Spirit,  if  this  be  laid  down  as  the 
issue  of  the  contest,  that  the  man  works  from  the  will  of  the 
flesh,  not  from  concupiscence  of  the  Spirit.    This  is  the  result 
of  the  battle,  which  is  laid  down  by  those  who  interpret  the 
chapter  concerning  actual  good  and  evil.    To  any  who  earn- 
estly peruses  the  passage,  it  w^ill  indeed  appear  evident  that 
such  a  contest  cannot  be  ascribed  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  without 
enormous  disgrace  to  Him.    For,  what  is  it  ?    It  is  said  to  be 
a  contest,  and  a  waging  of  war,  between  "  the  law  of  the 
mind,"  that  is,  the  Holy  Spirit  dwelling  within,  and  "  the  law 
of  the  members  ;"   and  the  victory  is  assigned  to  the  law  of 
the  members  against  the  law  of  the  mind  ;   for  it  leads  the 
man  away,  as  a  captive,  to  the  law  of  sin,  the  Holy  Spirit, 
who  dwells  within  vainly  resisting  and  warring  against  it. 
Under  these  circumstances,  is  not  the  Holy  Spirit  represented 
as  being  much  weaker  than  the  law  in  the  members,  that  is, 
than  the  lust  of  the  flesh  and  indwelling  sin  ?    The  man  who 
denies  this,  will  deny  that  the  sun  shines  when  he  is  to  be 
seen  in  all  his  meridian  splendor.    For,  in  this  place,  no  men- 
tion is  made  of  his  spontaneous  yielding  or  surrender,  of  de- 
sisting from  the  combat,  or  the  casting  away  of  his  weapons, 
which  we  have  declared  to  be  the  cause  why  he  who  begins 
to  fight  in  the  Spirit  is  conquered  by  the  flesh.    But  no  men- 
tion of  such  circumstances  can  here  be  made  ;  for  it  is  said  to 
be  a  battle,  and  a  waging  of  war  not  between  "  the  law  of  the 
members"  and  a  man  who  uses  "the  law  of  the  mind,"  but 
to  be  between  "  the  law  of  the  mind"  and  "  the  law  of  the 
members ;"  to  which  law  of  the  mind  the  casting  away  of  its 


422 


JAMES  AEMINIU8. 


weapons  cannot  be  attributed,  for  it  is  itself  engaged  in  the 
battle  and  [per  se  ipsam]  not  by  proxy.  Neither  can  a  de- 
sisting from  the  combat  be  ascribed  to  the  Jaw  of  the  mind 
before  it  has  actually  been  conquered  and  overcome.  Much 
less  can  a  spontaneous  surrender  be  attributed  to  it,  because 
this  can  by  no  means  occur  between  these  two  combatants. 
For  "  the  law  of  the  mind"  must  necessarily  lose  its  life,  and 
cease  to  have  any  existence,  before  it  willingly  and  spontane- 
ously yields  to  the  rebellious  flesh. 

(2.)  Some  one,  however,  may  reply,  "  This  is  a  metaphori- 
cal kind  of  speaking  or  discourse,  and  through  a  Prosopopoeia, 
a  person  and  the  properties  of  a  person  are  attributed  to  the 
law  of  the  mind  and  to  that  of  the  members.  But,  properly 
and  without  any  trope  or  figure,  this  man  is  said  to  fight  with 
himself;  that  is,  the  man,  as  he  is  regenerate^  fights  with  him- 
self as  he  is  unregenerateP 

My  answer  to  this  is,  there  is  nothing  to  prevent  the  thing 
from  being  done  in  the  manner  now  specified  ;  for  a  regene- 
rate man,  as  such,  fights  in  the  power  and  strength  of  the 
grace  and  the  Spirit  of  Christ.  Therefore,  if  while  fighting 
he  is  conquered,  the  grace  and  the  Spirit  of  Christ  are  over- 
come, which  would  be  a  fact  most  ignominious  to  the  grace 
and  Spirit  of  Christ.  But  if  he  be  conquered  while  in  a  state 
of  nonresistance^  and  not  during  the  conflict,  but  after  he  has 
cast  away  his  weapons  or  has  desisted  from  the  combat,  then 
this  is  not  the  case  which  is  the  subject  of  the  present  inves- 
tigation ;  for,  in  the  case  stated  by  the  apostle,  the  man  is 
made  prisoner  while  in  actual  combat^  not  after  he  has  ceased 
to  be  a  belligerant ;  because  the  effect  and  accomplishment  of 
this  bringing  into  captivity  is  joined  to  the  act  of  waging  war 
and  that  indeed  immediately.  But  these  two  are  properly 
joined  together,  and  in  a  manner  that  is  agreeable  to  the  na- 
ture of  parties  fighting  against  each  other,  if  "  the  law  of  the 
mind,"  that  is,  the  conscience,  convinced  of  the  equity  and 
justice  of  the  law,  be  said  to  contend  wdth  "  the  law  of  the 
members ;"  for  the  former  is  conquered  while  fighting  and  in 
the  very  midst  of  the  conflict,  because  it  is  too  weak  to  be  ca- 
pable of  withstanding  the  impetuosity  of  the  shock  against 


DISSERTATION. 


423 


"  the  law  of  the  members,"  that  is,  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  and 
the  desires  of  sin,,  though  it  earnestly  strives  to  bear  away,  by 
every  exertion  and  with  all  its  powers,  the  palm  of  victory 
from  the  field  of  battle. 

2.  But  matter  of  fact  teaches  that  this  opinion  is  inimical 
and  hurtful  to  good  morals.  For  nothing  can  be  imagined 
more  noxious  to  true  morality  than  to  assert  that  "  it  is  a  prop- 
erty of  the  regenerate  not  to  do  the  good  which  they  would, 
and  to  do  the  evil  which  they  would  not  i"^^  because  it  necessa- 
rily follows  from  this  that  those  persons  flatter  themselves  in 
their  sins,  who,  whi^e  sinning,  feel  that  they  do  so  with  a  re- 
luctant conscience  and  with  a  will  that  offered  some  resistance. 
For  they  conclude  themselves  to  be  regenerate  from  this  cir- 
cumstance— because  it  is  not  one  of  the  properties  of  the  un- 
regenerate  to  do  the  evil  which  they  would  not,  and  to  commit 
the  performance  of  the  good  which  they  would  ;  the  un regen- 
erate being  those  who  omit  the  good,  and  perpetrate  the  evil, 
with  a  full  consent  of  the  will,  and  without  any  resistance.  I 
truly  and  sacredly  affirm  that  this  has,  in  more  instances  than 
one,  fallen  within  the  range  of  my  experience  :  When  I  have 
admonished  certain  persons  to  exercise  a  degree  of  caution 
over  themselves  and  to  guard  against  the  commission  of  some 
wickedness  which  they  knew  to  be  prohibited  by  the  law,  they 
have  replied  that  it  was  indeed  their  will  so  to  refrain,  but 
that  they  nmst  declare,  with  the  apostle.  We  are  unable  to  'per- 
form the  good  which  we  wouldP 

"  I  speak  the  truth  in  Christ  and  lie  not,  my  conscience  also 
bearing  me  witness  in  the  Holy  Ghost,"  that  I  have  received 
this  very  answer  from  a  certain  individual,  not  after  he  had 
perpetrated  the  crime,  but  when  he  was  previously  admonish- 
ed not  to  commit  it.  I  am  also  acquainted  with  a  lady,  who 
on  being  admonished  and  blamed  lor  a  certain  deed  which  she 
knew  she  had  perpetrated  against  the  law  ol  God  and  her  own 
conscience,  coolly  replied  "  that  as  she  had  done  that  deed  with 
a  reluctant  will  and  not  with  a  full  consent,  in  this  she  experi- 
enced something  similar  to  what  the  apostle  Paul  endured 
when  he  said.  The  evil  that  I  would  not,  thai  I  do,^"^  I  have 
known  both  men  and  women,  young  persons  and  old,  who. 


42i 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


■when  I  have  explained  this  seventh  chapter  of  the  epistle  to 
the  Romans  in  the  sense  in  which  I  defend  it  in  this  treatise, 
have  openly  confessed  to  me  "  that  thej  had  always  previously 
entertained  the  opinion  that,  if  they  had  actually  perpetrated 
any  evil  with  a  reluctant  mind,  or  had  omitted  the  perform- 
ance of  any  good  when  their  conscience  exclaimed  against 
such  omission,  it  was  not  necessary  for  them  to  care  much 
about  the  matter  or  deeply  to  lament  it,  since  they  considered 
themselves  in  this  respect  to  be  similar  to  St.  Paul."  These 
persons,  therefore,  have  returned  me  hearty  thanks,  as  they 
have  declared,  because,  by  my  interpretation,  I  had  delivered 
them  from  that  false  opinion. 

3.  But,  lest  it  might  appear  that  I  alone  make  this  assertion, 
and,  without  any  witness  or  supporter,  declare  that  "  the  opin- 
ion which  interprets  this  chapter  as  referring  to  actual  good 
and  evil,  is  adverse  to  good  morals  and  to  piety,"  let  us  now 
see  what  judgment  some  of  the  ancients  have  formed  about 
this  matter. 

AlJGUSTmE. 

"When  discussing  these  words  of  the  apostle — "for  the  good 
that  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil  which  I  would  not,  that  I 
do" — this  lather  makes  the  following  remarks  : 

As  often  as  the  divine  words  which  have  just  been  recited 
from  the  epistle  of  the  apostle  Paul,  are  read,  it  is  to  be  feared 
that,  when  they  are  incorrectly  understood,  they  furnish  an 
occasion  to  men  who  are  seeking  one;  because  they  are  incli- 
ned to  the  commission  of  sin,  and  with  difficulty  restrain 
themselves.  Therefore,  when  they  have  heard  the  apostle  de- 
claring, "  For  the  good  that  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil 
which  I  hate,  that  I  do,"  they  commit  evil ;  and,  as  if  dis- 
pleased with  themselves  because  they  thus  do  evil,  they  sup- 
pose that  they  resemble  the  apostle,  who  said,  "For  the  good 
that  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil  which  I  would  not,  that  I 
do."  For  this  passage  is  sometimes  read,  and  at  present  im- 
poses on  us  the  necessity  of  admonishing,  that,  when  men 


DISSEETATIOIT. 


425 


take  it  in  a  wrong  acceptation,  they  convert  salutary  food  into 
poison.    {On  Time^  Sermons  43  &  45,  torn.  10.) 

But  lest,  in  this  battle,  these  divine  words  when  read  should 
seem,  to  those  who  have  not  a  good  understanding  of  them, 
as  the  trumpet  of  the  enemy's  arm}^  and  not  that  of  our  own 
ranks,  by  which  we  may  be  incited,  and  not  by  which  we 
may  be  conquered,  pay  attention,  I  beseech  you,  my 
brethren,  and,  you  who  are  in  the  contest,  contend  man- 
fully. For,  you  who  have  not  yet  begun  the  combat,  will 
not  understand  what  I  say ;  but  you  who  are  now  contend- 
ing, will  easily  understand  my  meaning.  I  speak  openly ; 
your  words  will  be  in  silence.  Recollect,  in  the  first  place, 
what  the  apostle  has  written  to  the  Galatians,  from  which  this 
passage  may  be  well  expounded  ;  for,  speaking"  to  believers 
who  had  been  baptized,  he  says — speaking  to  them  as  those 
to  whom  all  sins  had  been  remitted  in  the  sacred  laver  ;  but 
speaking  to  them  as  to  those  who  are  still  fighting,  he  says, 
"  This  I  say  then  :  Walk  in  the  Spirit  and  ye  shall  not  fulfill 
the  lusts  of  the  flesh."  He  has  not  said.  Ye  shall  not  do  or 
perform^  but.  Ye  shall  not  fulfill  or  perfect.  And  why  does 
he  say  this  ?  He  proceeds  to  say  "for  the  flesh  lusteth  against 
the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against  the  flesh ;  for  these  are  con- 
trary, the  one  to  the  other,  that  ye  may  not  do  the  things 
that  ye  would.  But  if  ye  be  led  of  the  Spirit,  ye  are  not 
Tinder  the  law."  If  ye  he  led  of  the  Spirit —  What  is  "  to 
be  led  of  the  Spirit"  ?  To  consent  to  the  Spirit  of  God  which 
commands,  and  not  to  the  flesh  which  lusteth.  Yet  it  lusts, 
and  resists,  and  wills  something,  and  thou  wiliest  not.  Per- 
severe in  not  willing  [that  which  the  flesh  wills].  And  yet 
thy  desire  to  God  should  be  of  this  description,  that  there 
may  not  be  any  concupiscence  for  thee  to  resist.  Consider 
what  I  have  said.  I  repeat  it :  Thy  request  unto  God  should 
be  of  this  kind,  that  no  concupiscence  whatever  may  remain 
which  it  may  be  necessary  for  thee  to  resist.  For  thou  dost 
resist ;  and,  by  not  consenting,  thou  dost  overcome  ;  but  it  is 
.far  better  to  have  no  enemy  than  to  conquer  one.  The  time 
will  arrive  when  that  enemy  will  have  no  existence.  Apply 
thy  mind  to  the  notes  of  triumph,  and  see  if  it  will  be  "  O 
28  VOL  n. 


426 


JAMES  ARMINrUS. 


death,  where  is  thy  contest  ?"  It  will  not  be  "  0  death,  where 
is  thy  sting  ?"  Thou  shalt  seek  its  place,  and  shalt  not  find 
it.  {Ihid.) 

In  a  subsequent  passage  on  the  same  treatise,  when  explain- 
ing still  more  plainly  the  meaning  of  the  apostle,  lest  his 
words  should  prove  hurtful  to  those  who  seek  occasion,  St. 
Augustine  writes  in  the  following  manner  : 

The  apostle,  therefore,  does  not  what  he  would,  because  he 
wills  not  to  lust  or  indulge  in  concupi'scence  ;  yet  he  lusts  ; 
therefore  he  does  the  evil  which  he  wills  not.    Did  this  evil 
concupiscence  draw  the  apostle  into  subjection  to  lust  for  for- 
nication ?    By  no  means.    Let  not  such  thoughts  as  these  arise 
in  thy  heart.    He  contended  against  it ;  he  was  not  subdued. 
But  because  he  willed  not,  and  had  this  against  which  he 
might  contend,  therefore  he  said  "  What  I  would,  that  do  I 
not ;"  I  will  oiot  to  lust^  or  to  indulge  in  concupiscence,  and 
yet  /  do  lust.    "  Therefore,  what  I  would,  that  do  I  not 
but  yet  I  consent  not  to  concupiscence.    For,  otherwise,  he 
would  not  have  said,  "  Ye  shall  not  fulfill  the  lusts  of  the 
fiesh,"  if  he  fal filled  them  himself.    But  he  has  placed  for 
thee,  before  thy  eyes,  the  combat  in  which  he  was  engaged, 
that  thou  mayest  not  be  afraid  concerning  thine  own.    For,  if 
the  blessed  apostle  had  not  said  this,  when  thou  hast  perceiv- 
ed concupiscence  in  motion  within  thy  members  to  which  thou 
wouldst  not  yield  thy  consent,  yet,  since  thou  hast  perceived 
it  to  be  in  motion,  perhaps  thou  mightest  despair  concerning 
thyself,  and  say — If  I  helonged  unto  God.^  I  should  not  have 
such  motions.    Look  at  the  apostle  engaged  in  the  battle,  and 
be  unwilling  to  fill  thyself  with  despair.    He  says,  "  But  I  see 
another  law  in  my  members,  warring  against  the  law  of  my 
mind  ;  and  because  I  am  unwilling  that  it  should  wage  war,  for 
it  is  my  own  flesh,  I  am  myself  the  person,  it  is  a  part  of  myself 
— "  that  which  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil  which  I  hate, 
that  do  I,"  because  I  lust.    Therefore,  the  good  which  I  do 
in  not  giving  consent  to  my  evil  concupiscence,  I  perform  it, 
but  I  do  not  perfect  it.    And  concupiscence,  which  is  my  en- 


DISSERTATION.         "  427 

emy,  performs  evil,  and  does  not  perfect  it.  In  what  way  do 
]  perform  good  and  not  perfect  it  ?  I  perform  good  when  I 
do  not  consent  to  evil  concupiscence,  but  I  do  not  perfect  good 
so  as  not  to  indulge  the  least  concupiscence.  Again,  there- 
fore, in  what  way  does  my  enemy  perform  evil,  and  not  per- 
fect evil  ?  It  performs  evil,  because  it  puts  evil  desires  in  mo- 
tion. It  does  not  perfect  evil,  because  it  does  not  draw  me  to 
evil.  {Ibid) 

VENERABLE  BEDE. 

But  the  thing  which  I  do  or  perform  is  to  lust,  not  to  con- 
sent to  lust ;  lest  any  one  should  now  seek  in  the  apostle  an 
example  for  himself,  and  should  himself  afford  a  bad  one. 
"  That  which  I  would,  I  do  not."  For  what  saith  the  law  ? 
"  Thou  shalt  not  covet."  And  it  is  not  my  will  to  lust,  and 
yet  I  lust,  though  I  give  no  consent  to  my  lust,  and  though  I 
go  not  after  it.    {On  Romans  vii.) 


428  JAMES  AKMmnjs 

n.     VARIOUS  OBJECTIONS  IN  FAVOE  OF  THE  COMMON  INTEKPEET- 
ATION  ANSWERED. 

1.  An  objection  for  the  common  interjjretation  ;  it  is  possible 
for  this  to  be  the  meaning  of  Romans  vii,  "  that  the  regene- 
rate do  not  so  frequently  and  so  perfectly  perform  what  is 
good^  and  omit  what  is  evil^  as  they  wish^  Reply :  The 
gloss  is  contrary  to  the  text^  because  this  chapter  describes 
the  continuous  state  of  the  man  about  whom  it  treats.  2. 
The  manner  in  which  /St.  Paul  would  have  spoken^  if  he 
had  intended  to  convey  the  meaning  that  generally  obtains^ 
and  this  in  conformity  with  the  style  and  modes  of  sjpealting 
which  he  usually  adopts  in  other  passages  when  W7'iting 
concerning  himself.  An  argument  against  the  usually 
received  opinion.,  taJcen  from  those  things  which  have  been 
previously  spoken^  and  which  are  here  reduced  into  the 
form  of  a  syllogism.  3.  Another  objection  in  favor  of  the 
common  interpretation^  and  this  in  two  members.  An  an- 
swer to  the  first  member.  An  answer  to  the  second^ 'Hhat 
when  the  regenerate  sin.,  they  sin  with  reluctance.''^  Every 
inward  struggle  against  sin  is  not  a  sign  that  the  man  is 
regenerate.  4.  Another  objection.,  and  a  reply  to  it.  Re- 
marks on  a  complete  and  an  incomplete  will.  The  regene- 
rate will  not.,  with  a  complete  will.,  more  good  than  they 
perform.,  neither  perpetrate  more  evil  than  they  will.  5. 
Each  of  us  must  institute  a  serious  examination  into  him- 
self and  into  all  the  motions  of  his  will. 

1.  But  some  one  will  say,  in  defence  of  this  modem  opin- 
ion, and  in  order  to  wipe  away  this  double  stain,  "  By  this  in- 
terpretation, no  injury  is  inflicted  on  divine  grace,  and  no 
harm  is  done  to  good  morals."  Some  other  man,  possessed 
of  still  greater  vehemence  in  defending  the  opinion  which  he 
has  once  conceived,  will  bring  against  me  the  charge  of  cal- 
umny, [and  will  say,]  "  It  is  a  well  known  fact  that  they  who 
give  this  interpretation  to  the  chapter,  do  not  take  away  from 
the  regenerate  the  performance  of  all  actual  good,  and  the 
omission  of  what  is  evil,  and  consequently,  [the  work  of]  the 


DISSEETATION. 


429 


grace  of  regeneration  ;  but  this  is  all  that  they  affirm  :  Some- 
times^ nay^  very  often^  those  men  who  are  regenerated  hy  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  do  the  evil  which  they  would  not^  and^  far 
more  frequently^  omit  or  do  not  perform  the  good  which  they 
would  ;  and  the  same  regenerate  persons  never  perform  so 
perfectly  the  good  which  they  do  as  they  will  to  perform 
it,  and  they  never  omit  evil  so  perfectly  as  they  loill  to 
omit  it.  But  neither  of  these  assertions  can  be  denied  by 
those  who  acknowledge  the  imperfection  of  righteousness  in 
this  life,  and  who  accurately  consider  the  examples  of  the  most 
holy  of  mortals  which  are  depicted  in  the  Holy  Scriptures." 

I  reply,  this  subterfuge  affords  no  defence  or  excuse  for  the 
modern  explanation  of  Romans  vii.  For,  (as  the  phrase  is,) 
in  this  instance  the  gloss  is  contrary  to  the  text.  For  that 
chapter  does  not  treat  about  that  which  occasionally  befalls 
the  man  who  is  the  subject  of  discussion,  but  about  what  gen- 
erally  and  for  the  most  part  is  accustomed  to  happen  to  him  ; 
and  it  contains  a  description  of  the  continuous  state  of  the  man 
about  whom  it  treats.  This  is  openly  declared  by  the  words 
themselves  and  by  the  mode  of  speech  employed.  The  apos- 
tle says,  "  The  good  that  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil 
which  I  w^ould  not,  that  I  do."  This  is  said  without  any  dis- 
tinction or  contraction  of  the  general  saying  to  its  being  spe- 
cially understood  as  though  he  sometimes  did  not  the  good 
which  he  would,  and  sometimes  did  the  evil  w^hich  he  would 
not,  or  as  though  he  many  times  abstained  from  the  evil  which, 
he  hates,  and  performed  the  good  which  he  would.  But  the 
apostle  simply  and  indefinitely  enunciates  concerning  the  de- 
tested evil  that  he  perpetrates  it,  and  concerning  the  good 
which  he  willed  that  he  performs  it  not. 

But  if  this  indefinite  enunciation  be  said  to  mean  "  that  the 
good  which  has  been  willed  is  more  frequently  performed  than 
omitted,  and  that  the  detested  evil  has  been  more  frequently 
avoided  than  committed,"  which  must  necessarily  be  affirmed 
by  those  who  explain  the  chapter  in  reference  to  a  regenerate 
man,  for  a  regenerate  man  walks  not  according  to  the  fiesh, 
but  according  to  the  Spirit — then  I  say,  the  apostle  did  not 
know  how  to  enunciate  his  own  meaning.    For  indefinite 


430 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


enunciations  possess  equal  force  with  those  which  are  univer- 
sal, or  they  approach  as  near  as  possible  to  them  ;  they  enun- 
ciate, concerning  objects,  those  attributes  which  are  in  every 
one  of  them  and  at  all  times,  or  most  usually  and  according  to 
the  more  excellent  part.  Thus  it  is  said  concerning  the  Cre- 
tians,  that  they  are  liars.  (Titus  i,  12.)  The  Athenians  are 
said  to  be  light  and  frivolous,  and  to  take  pleasure  in  "  hearing 
some  new  thing ;"  and  the  Carthaginians  are  called  perfidious. 
The  Scriptures  speak  thus,  that  the  Jews  have  been  rejected 
on  account  of  the  greater  part,  (for  "  God  doth  not  cast  away 
his  people  whom  he  foreknew,")  and  that  the  gentiles  were  re- 
ceived into  their  place.  For  power  was  given,  and  a  com- 
mand enjoined  on  the  apostles,  to  preach  the  gospel  to  all  na- 
tions, and  most  of  them  have  now  long  since  been  converted 
to  Christ,  or  will  yet  be  converted.  I^either  in  this  chapter 
is  the  apostle  treating  about  a  perfect  and,  in  every  respect, 
complete  performance  of  good  and  omission  of  evil,  but  sim- 
ply about  the  performance  of  the  one  and  the  omission  of  the 
other.  For  he  says  that  the  man  commits  evil,  but  not  per- 
fectly^, if  he  is  regenerate  ;  otherwise,  he  would  sin  with  an  en- 
tire and  full  wilL  But  this  will  be  subsequently  treated  at 
greater  length. 

2.  But  if  St.  Paul  intended  in  this  chapter  to  convey  such 
a  meaning  as  those  interpreters  ascribe  to  him,  then  he  must 
have  spoken  in  the  following  manner,  if  he  was  desirous  of 
saying  things  in  accordance  with  himself :  "  "We  know  that 
the  law  is  spiritual,  and  requires  from  us  an  obedience  perfect 
in  all  its  parts,  and  continuous  without  any  intermission  or  in- 
terruption. But  I  have  not  yet  so  far  conquered  the  flesh,  I 
have  not  yet  such  a  complete  dominion  over  sin,  neither  have 
I  broken  or  subdued  the  luets  of  the  flesh  so  much,  as  to  be 
able  to  perform  that  perfect  and  uninterrupted  obedience  to 
the  law.  For  it  occasionally  happens  to  me,  that  I  do  the  evil 
which  I  would  not,  and  omit  the  good  which  I  would ;  nay,  I 
perceive  that  I  never  perform  what  is  good  in  such  per- 
fection and  with  so  much  zeal  as  it  is  in  my  will  to  perform  ; 
nor  have  I  omitted  what  is  evil  in  such  perfection  as  I  have 
wished.    For  in  both  cases,  even  while  I  am  performing  what 


DISSERTATION. 


431 


is  good  and  omittiDg  what  is  evil,  I  feel  the  concupiscence  of 
the  flesh  struggling  and  resisting ;  and  I  consider  myself  to 
have  experienced  admirable  success  if  I  come  victorious  out  of 
the  combat,  that  is,  if  I  do  that  which  the  Spirit  lusteth,  and 
not  what  the  flesh  lusteth." 

Such  a  declaration  as  this  would  have  been  suitable  to  the 
sense  which  they  attribute  to  the  apostle,  and  this  is  properly 
the  index  and  interpreter  of  that  meaning.  But  many  passa- 
ges of  Scripture,  in  wiich  the  apostle  treats  about  himself, 
teach  us  that  he  ought  to  have  spoken  thus,  if  he  had  spoken 
things  that  were  consistent  with  himself :  "  For  I  am  con- 
scious to  myself  of  nothing ;  yet  am  I  not  hereby  justified." 
(1  Cor.  iv,  4.)  "I  therefore  so  run,  not  as  uncertainly;  so 
perform  I  my  part  as  a  combatant,  not  as  one  who  beateth  the 
air ;  but  I  beat  down  and  keep  my  body  under,  and  bring  it 
into  subjection  ;  lest  that  by  any  means,  when  I  have  preach- 
ed to  others,  I  myself  should  become  a  reprobate."  (ix,  26, 
27.)  "  Be  ye  followers  of  me,  even  as  I  also  am  of  Christ." 
(xi,  1.)  " — While  we  look  not  at  the  things  which  are  seen, 
but  at  the  things  which  are  not  seen  ;  for  the  things  which  are 
seen  are  temporary,  but  those  which  are  not  seen  are  eternal." 
(2  Cor.  iv,  18.)  " — Giving  no  oflence  in  any  thing,  that  the 
ministry  be  not  blamed  ;  but  in  all  things  approving  ourselves 
as  the  ministers  of  God,  in  much  patience,"  &c.  (vi,  3-10.) 
"  For  I  through  the  law  am  dead  to  the  law,  that  I  may  live 
unto  God.  I  am  crucified  with  Christ ;  nevertheless  I  live  ; 
yet  not  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me  ;  and  the  life  which  I  now 
live  in  the  flesh,  I  live  by  the  faith  of  the  Son  of  God,  who 
loved  me,  and  gave  himself  for  me."  (Gal.  ii,  19,  20.)  "  But 
God  forbid  that  I  should  glory,  save  in  the  cross  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  through  whom  the  world  is  crucified  unto  me, 
and  I  unto  the  world."  (vi,  14.)  Many  other  passages  of  a 
similar  import  might  be  cited. 

Since,  therefore,  this  interpretation  does  not  agree  with  the 
chapter,  it  cannot,  by  this  opinion,  be  excused  from  the  two 
crimes  which  are  objected  against  it,  [as  being  injurious  to  di- 
vine grace,  and  noxious  to  good  morals].  Wherefore  I  per- 
sist in  preferring  the  same  accusation,  and  I  declai-e, 


432 


JA^IES  ARMINITTS. 


The  opinion  which  attributes  to  a  regenerate  man  "  that  he 
generally  does  the  evil  which  he  would  not,  and  that  he  most 
commonly  omits  the  good  which,  he  would,"  is  injurious  to 
the  grace  of  regeneration  and  hurtful  to  good  morals  ; 

But  the  opinion  which  explains  Romans  vii  as  referring  to 
a  regenerate  man,  attiibutes  these  things  to  one  who  is  re- 
generate ; 

Therefore,  this  opinion  is  injurious  to  the  grace  of  regenera- 
tion, and  hurtful  to  good  morals. 

The  light  of  the  major  proposition  is  so  great  as  not  to  re- 
quire either  proof  or  illustration.  The  minor  is  in  the  text. 
For,  as  has  already  been  shewn,  to  the  man  about  whom  the 
apostle  is  treating  it  is  attributed,  that  he  most  commonly  com- 
mits what  is  evil  and  omits  w^hat  is  good ;  therefore,  the  con- 
clusion properly  follows. 

It  appears,  therefore,  that  I  have  not  through  calumny  affix- 
ed this  objection  to  the  opinion  which  is  opposed  to  my  own ; 
and  I  can  sacredly  affirm,  now,  that-  prior  to  the  act  of  taking 
the  pen  into  my  hands,  I  had  made  a  vow  before  God  that 
[in  the  discussion  of  this  subject]  I  would  indulge  in  no  cal 
umny.  "Wherefore,  though  the  objection  were  false,  it  would 
in  that  case  have  escaped  from  me  through  ignorance  and  not 
through  malice. 

3.  Some  one,  however,  who  is  desirous  of  pertinaciously 
keeping  and  retaining  the  thesis  which  has  been  once  laid 
down,  will  here  reply — "  Let  it  be  granted,  that  this  explana- 
tion is  deficient  in  those  things  which  the  apostle  attributes  to 
this  man  ;  let  it  likewise  be  granted,  that  the  interpretation  pro- 
duced by  other  persons  is  not  suitable  to  the  passage  ;  yet  it  does 
not  become  disadvantageous  to  good  morals,  nor  is  any  injury 
inflicted  on  grace  through  this  opinion,  provided  that  the  whole 
together  be  excepted,  as  it  equitably  should  be,  and  that  one 
part  be  not  separated  from  another — this  also  being  granted, 
that,  though  this  interpretation  be  unsuitable  for  Romans  vii, 
yet  it  is  agreeable  to  the  rest  of  tbe  Scriptures  and  to  the  anal- 
ogy of  faith." 

(1.)  That  I  may  not  seem  to  be  too  rigid,  I  am  willing  to 


DISSERTATION.  433 

grant  the  former  of  these  ;  about  the  latter  we  shall  see  some- 
thing further.  For  I  own,  that  the  opinion  of  St.  Augustine, 
which  interprets  the  chapter  as  relating  onlj  to  the  act  and 
motion  of  concupiscence,  neither  proves  to  be  detrimental  to 
grace,  nor  injurious  to  good  morals,  though  he  explains  the 
passage  concerning  a  regenerate  man. 

But  I  say  that,  after  it  has  been  impressed  and  inculcated 
on  the  minds  of  hearers  or  readers  that  tM  ajpostle  is  treating 
about  a  regenerate  man  in  Boraans  yii,  it  is  not  in  our  power 
to  hinder  such  persons  from  understanding  the  rest  of  those 
things  which  are  attributed  to  this  man  in  a  different  manner 
from  that  in  which  thej  ought  to  be  understood,  that  is,  from 
receivino^  them  in  an  acce]:)tation  which  is  not  atrreeable  to  the 
text  and  design  of  the  apostle,  and  as  they  are  not  received 
when  they  are  explained  as  relating  to  a  man  who  is  under 
sin,  and  under  the  law,  especially  when  the  inclination  is  a 
persuasive  to  such  an  interpretation,  and  when  the  concupis- 
cence of  the  flesh  gives  a  similar  impulse.  This,  as  I  have 
already  related,  has  been  actually  done  by  many  j)eople,  and 
certainly  not  without  blame  attached  to  the  opinion  itself, 
though  "  the  whole  of  it  be  received  together."  For  this  is 
not  the  only  thing  declared  by  that  opinion,  The  regenerate 
sometimes  commit  sin ;  and  they  never  perfectly  perform 
what  i?  good,  and  omit  what  is  evil,  while  they  continue  in  the 
present  life  but  this  is  likewise  added  :  "  It  is  a  property  of 
the  regenerate,  to  commit  sin  7iot  icith  a  full  consent  of  the 
will,  and  [inter peccanduni]  while  in  the  act  of  sinning  to  will 
not  to  sin  I  since  the  unregenerate  sin  with  a  full  consent  of 
the  will,  and  without  any  reluctance  on  its  part."  Those  per- 
sons who  wish  to  excuse  themselves  by  this  chapter,  and  who, 
while  engaged  in  sin,  feel  some  resistance  of  the  will  and  re- 
morse of  conscience  in  the  act  of  sinning,  conclude  from  the 
preceding  assertion,  that  they  commit  sin  not  ivith  a  full  con- 
sent of  the  willj  and,  therefore,  that  the  very  fact  itself  of  their 
thus  committing  sin  is  a  sign  of  their  regeneration.  Such  a 
conclusion  as  this  is  both  injurious  to  grace  and  inimical  to 
good  morals,  (i.)  It  is  injurious  to  grace,  because  it  lays 
that  down,  as  a  sign  of  regeneration,  which  is  alike  common 


434 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


to  the  regenerate  and  to  the  unregenerate,  that  is,  to  those  who 
are  under  the  law.  (ii.)  It  is  inimical  to  good  mortals,  be- 
cause sin  is  neither  so  much  avoided  bj  that  man  who  holds 
such  an  opinion  as  this,  nor  does  its  perpetration  produce  deep 
sorrow  in  him  who  is  its  author,  because/rom  the  mode  of  the 
deed  he  still  concludes  that  he  is  regenerate. 

(2.)  But  let  us  now  consider,  whether  those  things  which 
have  been  adduced  to  liberate  their  opinion  from  this  two-fold 
criminal  charge,  be  conformable  to  the  rest  of  the  Scriptures 
and  to  the  analogy  of  faith,  or  not.  I  confess  it  indeed  to  be  a 
very  great  truth,  that,  while  the  regenerate  pass  their  lives  in  this 
mortal  body,  they  neither  perfectly  perform  what  is  good,  nor 
omit  what  is  evil.  But  I  add,  that,  while  in  the  present  life, 
they  never  perfectly  will  what  is  good,  or  perfectly  hate  what 
is  evil.  I  likewise  confess,  that  even  the  best  of  the  regene- 
rate offend  in  many  things,  and  sometimes  actually  sin,  by  do- 
ing what  is  evil  and  omitting  what  is  good  ;  for  the  regenerate 
do  not  always  act  from  the  principle  of  regeneration. 

But  I  deny  that,  when  they  sin,  they  sin  unwillingly,  though 
they  may  do  so  with  a  struggle  in  their  mind  and  conscience. 
For,  while  the  contest  and  struggle  continued  between  the 
mind  and  the  flesh,  how  much  soever  they  might  nill  the  evil 
to  which  the  flesh  incited  them,  and  will  the  good  from  which 
it  dehorted  them  ;  yet  they  do  not  proceed  onward  to  the  deed 
itself  except  when  the  battle  is  terminated,  the  mind  or  con- 
science is  overcome,  and  after  the  will  has  yielded  consent  to  the 
flesh — though  such  consent  be  not  without  stinging  remorse  of 
conscience.  Then  I  deny,  that  it  can  be  concluded  from  this 
opposition  of  the  mind,  that  he  is  a  regenerate  man  who  sins 
in  this  manner.  For,  as  we  have  often  previously  shewn,  the 
commission  of  sin  with  a  reluctant  mind  and  conscience  be- 
longs to  many  of  the  unregenerate.  Besides,  as  we  have  also 
previously  taught,  that  resistance  which  immediately  preceded 
the  perpetration  of  sin,  was  not  from  the  Holy  Spirit  who  re- 
generated and  inhabited,  but  from  the  mind  which  was  con- 
vinced of  the  righteousness  and  equity  of  the  law.  For  the 
life  of  the  conscience  continues  ;  and  from  its  life,  action  and 
motion  remain,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  either  wholly  depart- 


DISSERTATION. 


435 


ed,  or  is  so  grieved  as  to  employ  no  motion  and  act  for  the 
hindrance  of  sin.  It  is  a  well  known  fact,  that  the  soul  in  man 
which  is  vegetative,  performs  the  first  and  the  last  offices  of 
life,  while  the  rational  soul  ceases  its  operations  as  in  the  case 
of  lunatics  and  maniacs,  and  the  sensitive  soul  desists  from 
acting  in  lethargic  persons.  I  wish  these  observations  to  re- 
ceive a  diligent  consideration  ;  for  they  have  a  great  tendency 
to  induce  a  man  to  enter  upon  a  serious  and  sure  examination 
respecting  himself,  to  attain  a  correct  knowledge  of  tlie  state 
of  regeneration^  and  sedulously  to  distinguish  between  it  and 
the  state  before  the  law^  and  chiefly  between  it  and  that  un- 
der the  law. 

4.  Yet  some  person  will  here  rejoin,  and,  for  the  sake  of 
excusing  or  defending  his  opinion,  will  say,  "  It  cannot  be  de- 
nied that  the  regenerate  will  more  good  than  they  actually 
perform^  and  perpetrate  more  evil  than  they  will." 

My  answer  is,  this,  wdien  correctly  understood,  may  be  con- 
ceded ;  for  it  is  stated  with  some  ambiguity.  "  To  will  and 
not  to  will  this  thing,"  may  be  understood  concerning  either  a 
complete  or  an  incomplete  volition  and  nolition,  (to  use  the 
words  of  Thomas  Aquinas,)  though  in  a  sense  a  little  different. 
(1.)  I  give  the  appellation  of  a  comjplete  will  to  that  which  is 
borne  to  a  particular  object  that  is  ])articidarly  considered, 
approving  or  disapproving  of  that  object  according  to  the  pre- 
script or  direction  of  the  last  judgment  of  the  reason  that  is 
formed  concerning  it.  (2.)  I  give  the  appellation  of  an  in- 
complete will  to  that  which  is  borne  towards  the  same  object 
generally  considered,  approving  or  disapproving  of  it  accord- 
ing to  the  prescript  or  direction  not  of  the  last  judgment  of  the 
reason  which  is  formed  concerning  it.  The  former  of  these, 
w^hich  is  indeed  complete,  may  be  called  simply  a  volition  and 
a  nolition.  But  the  latter,  which  is  incomplete,  is  otherwise 
expressed  by  the  words,  desire  and  wishing^  and  ought  to  be 
called  velleity  rather  than  will. 

Having  premised  these  things,  I  now  say.  It  cannot  be 
affirmed  with  truth,  "  that  a  regenerate  man  wills  inor^  good 
with  a  complete  will  than  he  actually  performs,"  unless  without 


436 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


any  fault  of  his  own,  he  be  hindered  by  necessity  or  by  some 
greater  force,  or  "  that  he  actually  does  more  evil  than  it  is  his 
will  to  do."  For  he  does  it  not  through  coaction.  A  mer- 
chant who,  for  the  sake  of  avoiding  shipwreck,  throws  his 
heavy  bales  into  the  sea,  willingly  performs  that  act,  having 
followed  this  last  judgment  of  his  reason — that  it  is  better  for 
his  bales  of  goods  to  be  destroyed,  than  for  himself  to  perish 
with  them.  Thus,  with  a  complete  (I  do  not  say  with  a  full) 
volition^  David  willed  his  adulterous  intercourse  with  Bath- 
sheba.  Willingly,  and  with  a  complete  volition^  Peter  denied 
Christ. 

But  if  this  be  understood  concerning  an  incomplete  will^ 
then  I  grant  it  may  be  said  "  that  the  regenerate  will  to  per 
form  more  good  than  they  really  execute,  and  to  omit  more 
evil  than  they  omit."  This,  however,  is  not  an  exclusive 
property  of  the  regenerate  ;  for  it  belongs  to  all  those  who  are 
so  under  the  law^  that  in  them  the  law  has  discharged  all  its 
functions,  and  (the  Holy  Spirit  employing  it  for  this  purpose) 
in  them  has  produced  all  those  effects  which  it  is  possible  and 
usual  for  the  law  to  produce.  Both  the  regenerate,  and  those 
who  are  under  the  law,  might  indeed  will,  that  there  was  not 
in  them  such  a  vast  force  and  efficacy  of  sin  yet  existing  and 
reigning  in  them  ;  and  might  wish,  that  they  were  not  solic- 
ited and  impelled  to  evil  deeds  through  concupiscence  and  the 
temptation  of  sin  ;  nay,  they  might  also  will  that  they  did  not 
lust  or  indulge  in  concupiscence ;  but  those  evil  acts  to  which 
they  are  solicited  by  sin  which  either  is  in  them,  or  dwells  in 
them  and  reigns,  they  do  not  perform,  except  through  the  in- 
tervention of  the  consent  of  the  will  that  has  been  obtained 
by  this  temptation  of  sin.  For  lust  does  not  bring  forth  sin, 
unless  it  has  conceived  ;  but  it  conceives  through  the  consent 
of  the  will  tanquam  ex  marito.  But  as  long  as  the  will  re- 
mains in  a  state  of  suspense,  inclining  to  neither  part,  so  long 
no  act  is  produced — as  we  behold  in  a  just  balance,  or  true 
scales,  of  which  neither  part  verges  upward  or  downward  prior 
to  one  of  them  receiving  an  accession  of  weight  which  de- 
presses that  scale  and  elevates  the  opposite  one.    All  motion 


DISSEETATION. 


437 


reclines  or  depends  on  rest  as  on  a  foundation.  Thus,  the  will 
does  not  move  towards  the  part  of  sin  unless  when  acquiescing 
in  its  temptation. 

5.  These  remarks  are  exceedingly  plain,  and  capable  of  being 
fully  confirmed  by  experience  itself,  if  any  one  will  only  accu- 
rately ponder  within  himself  all  the  motions  of  his  own  will. 
But  the  greatest  part  of  us  avoid  this  duty  ;  for  it  cannot  be 
performed  without  [inducing]  sorrow  and  sickness  of  mind, 
which  no  man  willingly  brings  upon  himself.  But  it  is  by  no 
means  probable,  that  sin  should  obtain  a  full  consent  from  the 
will  of  that  man  who  is  generally  well  instructed  in  the  right- 
eousness and  unrighteousness  of  actions,  before  he  has  ceased 
to  feel  any  sorrow  or  regret :  Wherefore,  the  difference  between 
a  regenerate  and  an  unregenerate  man  must  not  be  placed  in  this 
particular  when  both  of  them  commit  sin.  For,  in  that  particu- 
lar deed,  they  equally  yield  to  the  temptation  of  sin,  both  of  them 
sin  from  the  same  principle  of  depraved  nature,  and  in  both 
instances  the  resistance  is  one  and  the  same  when  sin  is  perpe- 
trated, that  is,  on  the  part  of  the  mind  and  conscience  convict- 
ed of  the  justice  or  the  injustice  of  the  deed.  For  if  the  Spirit 
were  itself  that  resistance,  then  sin  would  not  be  perpetrated 
in  the  very  act. 

"  Is  there  then  no  difference  between  the  regenerate  and  the 
unregenerate,  when  they  commit  sin  ?"  That  I  may  not  deny 
this,  I  say  that  such  difference  must  be  brought  forw^ard  Irom 
plain  passages  in  the  Holy  Scriptures ;  otherwise,  that  man 
will  deceive  himself  to  his  great  peril,  who  follows  some  other 
rule  of  judging. 


438 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


THE  COiTCLUSION, 

An  Examination  and  comparison  of  each  of  the  three  Inter- 
pretations  of  this  chapter.  1.  The  fikst,  which  is  the  latest 
of  the  two  ojnnions  embraced  Jjy  St.  Augustine^  and  which 
intetyrets  this  chapter  concerning  a  man  under  grace^  has 
various  disadvantages  :  (1,)  in  the  meaning  of  the  word 
CAKNAL,  and  that  of  the  phrase^  "  sold  under  sinP  (2.)  In 
the  explanation  of  the  evil  which.,  the  apostle  says^  he  did  ; 
and  of  the  good  which  he  omitted.  (3.)  In  the  explanation 
of  the  loord  to  do  or  to  perform.  (4.)  In  the  interpretation 
of  ^Hndwelling  sin?^  (3.)  In  the  explanation  of  "  the  law 
of  the  mind.''''  (6.)  In  explaining  the  captivity  of  man  under 
the  law  of  sin.  (7.)  In  the  distorted  meaning  given  to  the 
votive  exclamation.  (8.)  In  assigning  to  a  regenerate  man 
a  double  servitude^  and  in  interpreting  "  the  mincV  for 
"  the  spirit.''^  These  eight  inconveniences  are  sufficient  to 
induce  a  rejection  of  this  first  interpretation.  2.  The 
second,  xohich  is  that  of  modern  divines.^  and  which  also 
explains  the  chapter  concerning  a  man  under  grace^  in  addi- 
tion to  the  inconveniences  that  it  has  in  common  with  the 
first,  has  lilcewise  some  which  are  pecidiar  to  itsesf.  (1.) 
In  saying.^  what  perinanently  belongs  to  the  continuous 
state  of  this  man^  sometimes  only  happens  to  him.  (2.)  In 
giving  a  rash  explication  of  "  performing  that  which  is 
good?''  (3.)  In  asserting,  that  the  regenerate  commit  sin 
unwillingly.  (4.)  In  predicatiiig  contradictory  things  con- 
cerning this  man.  (5.)  In  predicating  with  restriction  those 
things  concerning  the  regenerate.^  which  the  Scriptures  simply 
attribute  to  them.  3.  The  third,  which  is  St.  Augustine's 
first  opinion^  as  well  as  that  of  Arminius,  and  which  under- 
stands this  chapter  as  relating  to  a  man  who  is  under  the 
law,  is  plain  and  perspicuous,  and  not  at  disagreement  either 
with  apostolical  phraseology  or  with  other  passages  of 
Scripture  ;  this  fact  is  rendered  obvious  even  from  this  cir- 
cumstance— that  this  man  is  said  at  once  to  be  ''^ placed  under 
the  law''''  and  "  under  the  dominion  of  sin.''''    4.  Thi 


DISSERTATION. 


439 


reatise  is  closed  loith  an  address^  hy  Arminius^  to  his  hreth- 
ren  in  the  ministry^  in  which  the  author  offers  himself  for 
examination^  with  a  most  serious  entreaty  for  them  to  ad- 
monish him  J  in  a  fraternal  manner^  if  he  has  erred  ;  lut  to 
yield  their  assent  to  the  truth^  if  he  has  in  this  worh  written 
such  things  as  are  in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures  and 
with  the  meaning  of  the  ajpostle. 

Let  us  now  briefly  compare  these  three  expositions  of  Eo- 
mans  vii :  First,  that  which  St.  Augustine  gave  not  long 
before  his  death  ;  secondly,  that  which  he  taught  in  early  life, 
which  is  likewise  my  interpretation,  and  that  of  many  doctors 
of  the  primitive  church,  as  I  have  already  proved,  and  that 
of  some  even  among  our  own  divines  ;  and,  lastly,  the  expo- 
sition of  those  persons  who  assent  to  St.  Augustine  in  this  par- 
ticular— that  in  common  with  him  they  explain  it  as  relating 
to  a  regenerate  man^  but  who  dissent  from  him  on  another 
particular — that  they  interpret  good  an  c^evil,  not  as  relating 
to  the  act  of  concupiscence,  hut  as  referring  to  actual  good 
and  evil. 

1.  That  St.  Augustine  might  be  able  to  interpret  this  chapter 
as  relating  to  a  regenerate  man  and  one  placed  under  grace, 
(which  he  supposed  would  be  serviceable  to  him  in  his  disputes 
with  the  Pelagians,)  he  was  compelled  to  put  a  forced  con- 
struction on  the  apostolical  ]3hraseology,  and  to  interpret  many 
things  in  opposition  to  the  express  meaning  and  intention  of 
the  apostle. 

(1.)  He  has  interpreted  a  carnal  man  to  mean  one  who  yet 
bears  about  with  him  mortal  flesh,  who  is  not  yet  become  spirit- 
ual in  the  flesh,  and  who  still  has  and  feels  within  himself  the 
lusts  of  the  flesh.  But  about  the  first  of  these  two  descriptions 
of  men  the  apostle  is  not  here  treating  :  It  is,  therefore,  quite 
beyond  the  purpose ;  and  I  beseech  St.  Augustine  to  point 
out  to  me  a  single  passage  of  Scripture,  in  which  the  regene- 
rate are  called  carnal  because  they  still  have  within  them  the 
lusts  of  the  flesh.  If  they  are  called  spiritual  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, "  because  by  the  Spirit  they  mortify  the  deeds  of  the 


JAMES  ARMINIXIS. 


flesh"  and  do  not  go  after  carnal  lasts,  but  walk  according 
to  the  Spirit,  then  indeed  thej  cannot  be  called  carnal  from 
the  fact  of  their  still  having  those  lusts.  They  may  be  called 
"those  who  are  not  perfectly  spiritual"  on  account  of  the 
presence  of  sinful  lusts  ;  but  they  can  by  no  means  be  styled 
carnal^  because  the  dominion  of  sin  is  taken  away  from 
them. 

In  a  similar  manner  he  was  under  the  necessity  of  distorting 
another  attribute  of  this  man,  sold  under  sin^  when  this  phrase 
properly  signifies  "  one  who  is  the  slave  of  sin,  and  who  serves 
sin,"  whether  he  does  this  willingly  without  any  resistance  of 
conscience,  or  in  opposition  to  his  mind  and  so  far  unwillingly. 
It  is  not  allowed  to  us  to  frame  petty  distinctions,  and,  accord- 
ing to  these,  to  attribute  to  persons  certain  words,  which  the 
Scriptures  do  not  employ,  in  that  sense,  and  which  are  not 
usually  ascribed  to  those  x^ersons  in  holy  writ. 

(2.)  Then  he  interprets  the  evil  which  the  apostle  says  he 
did,  by  the  word  to  lust  or  to  indulge  in  concupiscence  ;  and 
*the  good  which  he  says  he  omitted,  by  the  word  7iot  to  lust — 
a  most  absurd  and  distorted  application  of  those  terms  ! 

First.  Because  the  words,  Karspya^scfSai^  Hpatfcsiv  and  Hojsiv, 
"to  do,"  cannot  have  the  same  signification  as  concupisco,  "to 
lust."  At  least,  so  far  as  I  know,  the  Scriptures  have  in  no 
passage,  explained  "  to  lust"  by  any  of  those  three  words. 
And  St.  Augustine  himself,  in  the  definition  of  sin,  when  dis- 
tinguishing between  these  things,  says,  "Sin  is  every  thing 
which  is  spoken,  done,  and  lusted  or  desired  against  the  law 
of  God." 

Bucer,  in  his  "  Comment  on  Komans  vii,"says,  "  Some  per- 
sons receive  the  three  verbs  here  rendered  '  to  do,'  in  the 
acceptation,  '  to  lust,'  but  that  is  not  St.  Paul's  mode  of 
speaking.  He  understands  by  the  word,  the  deed  itself  which 
is  actually  committed  at  the  impulse  of  concupiscence,  in  op- 
position to  that  which  the  law  dictates,  and  which  the  mind, 
consenting  to  that  law,  approves.  Concwpitio,  '  to  lust'  or  de- 
sire, is  in  reality,  an  internal  act  of  concupiscence  in  the  mind, 
which  indulges  in  such  concupiscence.    But  these  verbs 'to 


DISSERTATION. 


441 


do,'  in  this  chapter  do  not  signify  an  internal  act  of  lusting, 
but,  properly,  the  external  act  of  doing  those  things  which 
have  been  lusted  or  desired."    {Fol.  369.) 

Secondly.  "  Sin  is  said  to  do  this  evil,  and,  by  the  perpe- 
tration of  the  evil,  to  slay  the  man  himself  ^  Sin  does  not 
slay  him  through  concupiscence.  St.  James  speaks  thus : 
"  Then  when  lust  hath  conceived,  it  bringeth  forth  sin  ;  and 
sin,  when  it  is  finished  [or  completed  by  action],  bringeth 
forth  death."  (i,  15.)  But  it  slays  the  man  through  actual 
sin.  This  is  declared  by  the  apostle  in  the  fifth  verse  of  this 
very  chapter,  when  he  says,  "for  when  we  were  in  the 
flesh,  the  motions  of  sin,  which  were  by  the  law,  did  work  in 
our  members  to  bring  forth  fruit  unto  death."  I  am  now 
speaking,  not  according  to  the  rigor  of  the  law,  but  according 
to  the  grace  of  the  gospel  in  Jesus  Chj-ist. 

Thirdly.  The  evil  and  the  good,  the  former  of  which,  he 
he  says,  he  perpetrates,  but  the  latter  he  omits,  are  so  opposed 
to  each  other,  that  evil  is  what  is  forbidden  by  a  prohibitive 
law,  which  law  is  usually  proposed  by  a  negative  ;  but  good 
is  what  is  commanded  by  a  preceptive  law,  which  is  usually 
propounded  by  an  afiirmative.  A  sin  is  perpetrated  against 
a  prohibitive  law  by  commission,  but  against  a  preceptive  law 
by  omission.  On  this  account  they  are  called  sins  of  omis- 
sion and  of  commission.  If  a  prohibitive  law  be  observed, 
evil  is  said  to  he  omitted^  but  if  a  preceptive  law  be  observed, 
good  is  said  to  he  performed. 

Now,  to  lust,  and  not  to  lust,  are  not  thus  opposed  to  each 
other.  For  though  to  lust  be  forbidden  by  a  prohibitive  law, 
yet  not  to  lust  is  not  commanded  by  a  preceptive  law ;  neither 
can  it  be  commanded  by  such  a  law  ;  for  not  to  lust  consists 
of  a  negative  or  the  omission  of  an  act ;  but  by  omission,  an 
offence  is  committed  against  a  preceptive  law.  But,  by  the 
omission  of  concupiscence,  no  offence  is  committed  against  a 
positive  or  preceptive  law,  but  a  prohibitive  law  is  fulfilled 
and  by  obedience,  which  consists  in  not  lusting,  good  is  not 
performed,  but  evil  is  omitted.  That  we  may  point  out  this- 
absurdity  [of  St.  Augustine's  exposition],  we  will  invert  in  the 
following  manner  what  the  apostle  has  said  :  "  The  good  that 
29  VOL.  n. 


442 


JAMES  AlJMINnJS. 


I  would,  I  do,"  that  is,  /  do  not  lust;  "  but  the  evil  which  I 
would  Dot,  I  do  not,"  that  is,  /  do  not  lust.  For  I  will  not  to 
lust^  and  I  do  not  lust ;  I  nill  to  lust^  and  I  do  not  lust.  There- 
fore, in  this  case,  the  very  same  act  is  the  performance  of  good 
and  the  omission  of  evil — a  complete  absurdity.  And  that  is 
called  the 'performance  of  a  good  action  which  is  the  omission, 
of  an  evil  one — an  equal  absurdity !  O  Augustine,  where 
was  thy  usual  acumen  ?  Let  the  expression  be  pardoned  ;  for 
a  GOOD  philosopher  is  not  always  a  philosopher,  and  our  Homer 
himself  will  sometimes  nod. 

Fourthly.  It  is  an  illogical  mode  of  expression  to  say,  "  I 
will  to  lust^^"^  and  "  I  will  not  to  lust^^^  because  actual  concu- 
piscence is  prior  to  volition  and  nolition,  and  the  act  of  con- 
cupiscence does  not  depend  upon  the  choice  or  determination 
of  the  will.  According  to  the  trite  and  true  saying,  "  first 
motions  are  not  in  our  power,  unless  they  be  occasioned  by 
some  act  of  the  will,"  as  the  schoolmen  express  themselves. 
But  we  must  say,  "  I  could  wish  not  to  lust,"  that  is,  "I  could 
wish  to  be  free  from  the  impulse  of  concupiscence."  And 
this  is  an  expression  of  desire,  not  tending  to  or  going  out 
towards  the  performance  or  omission  of  our  act^  but  earnestly 
demanding  the  act  of  another  person  for  our  liberation  from 
that  evil  which  impels  us  to  an  evil  act,  and  which  hinders  us 
from  a  good  act — we  approving  of  the  good  act  and  disappro- 
ving of  the  bad  one. 

(3.)  He  was  compelled,  when  expounding  what  the  apostle 
says  in  the  18th  verse,  "  But  to  perform  that  which  is  good  I 
find  not,"  to  interpret  it  by  "  completing  what  is  good,"  that 
is,  "  I  find  not  perfectly  to  do  what  is  good,"  as  is  evident  from 
those  passages  which  we  have  cited  from  St.  Augustine.  This 
interpretation  is  absurd,  distorted,  and  contradictory  to  the 
sentiments  and  meaning  of  the  author ;  for. 

First.  The  word,  KaTsp^a^stf^ai,  does  not  signify  "  to  per- 
fect," that  is,  "  perfectly  to  do  any  thing ;"  but  it  signifies  "to 
operate,  to  perform,  to  efiect,  or  to  do,"  as  this  word  is  most 
commonly  used,  not  for  "  doing  any  thing  perfectly,"  but  for 
"  producing  an  efiect."  My  observations  on  this  point  are  ev- 
ident from  the  text  itself ;  for  the  same  Greek  word  is  employed 


DISSEKTATIOIT. 


443 


in  the  first  clause  of  the  15th  verse,  when  the  apostle  says, 
"  Por  that  which  I  do,  I  allow  not yet  he  does  not  perfectly 
perform  the  evil  of  which  he  disapproves.  It  is  also  used  in 
the  latter  clause  of  the  20th  verse,  "  ]S[ow  then  it  is  no  more 
I  that  do  it,  but  sin  that  dwelleth  in  me."  But  sin  does 
not  perfectly  perpetrate  evil  in  this  man,  especially  if  he  be 
regenerate,  as  St.  Augustine  supposes ;  and  he  openly  says 
himself  the  contrary  to  this,  as  is  evident  from  the  passa- 
ges which  we  have  already  cited  in  the  fourth  part  of  this 
treatise. 

Secondly.  The  synonyms  of  this  rerb  which  are  promis- 
cuously used  in  the  seventh  chapter,  ^patftfEiv  and  ra'ojsjv,  prove  the 
same  thing.  For  the  apostle  says  that  he  does  and  performs 
the  evil  which  he  would  not,  (verses  15,  16,  19,)  yet  he  does 
noiperfectly  perform  that  evil ;  this  is  obvious  from  what  he 
adds,  "  which  I  would  notP  Therefore  he  performs  it  not 
with  a  full  consent  of  his  will.  For  this  is  confessed  by  St. 
Augustine,  when  he  explains  the  passage  about  the  regene- 
rate ;  but  he  does  it  not  with  a  full  consent  of  the  will^  that 
is,  he  does  it  not  perfectly. 

Thiedlt.  "  The  good  which  the  apostle  would,  but  which  he 
does  not,"  (19,)  is,  according  to  St.  Augustine,  not  to  lust. 
But  how  is  it  that  the  apostle  indeed  does  this  "  good,"  [by 
willing  it,  but  does  not  perfect  it  ?  Therefore,  a  two-fold  omis- 
sion of  concupiscence  must  be  laid  down  [by  those  who  adopt 
St.  Augustine's  argumentation,]  one,  under  the  term  to  do^  is 
called  an  imperfect  omission ;  the  other,  under  the  word  to 
complete.,  receives  the  appellation  of  perfect.  According  to 
St.  Augustine's  sense,  the  apostle  says  in  this  verse,  (19,)  "  I 
will  not  to  lust.,  and  this  good  I  indeed  <fo,  but  I  do  not  per- 
fect it."  From  this  remark,  the  absurdity  which  I  have  men- 
tioned is  most  manifest. 

Fourthly.  More  good  is  attributed  to  the  will  of  this  man, 
than  to  its  capability  and  powers  or  efficacy.  But  the  perfect 
volition  of  good  is  not  attributed  to  his  will,  neither  can  it  be 
attributed.  Therefore,  from  its  capability  and  efficacy  not 
only  can  ih^  perfect  performance  of  good  be  taken  away,  but 
the  imperfect  performance  is  likewise  taken  away  from  them. 


JAMES  AEMnnrs. 


That  is,  it  is  denied  respecting  this  man,  not  onlj  that  he  per- 
fects good,  but  that  he  even  performs  it.  Wherefore,  this 
passage  must  not  be  understood  concerning  perfection,  that  is, 
the  perfect  performance  of  good. 

(4.)  He  was  forced  to  interpret  "  sin  that  dwelleth  or  inhab- 
iteth  within  me,"  by  "  sin  existing  within,"  and  to  create  a 
distinction  between  it  and  "sin  reigning  and  exercising  the 
dominion  over  a  man,"  while  the  phrase,  "  dwelling  within 
me,"  denotes  dominion,  and  the  full  and  supreme  power  of 
him  who  is  the  resident,  as  we  have  previously  shewn  in  its 
proper  place.  But  it  is  apparent  that  sin  reigns  in  this  man  ; 
for  it  commits  that  sin  in  him  which  he  himself  would  not, 
and  leads  him  away  as  a  captive  under  its  power. 

(5.)  He  was  under  the  necessity  of  interpreting  "  the  law 
of  the  mind"  by  *'the  law  of  the  Spirit,"  though  in  contradic- 
tion to  the  great  contrariety  subsisting  between  the  attribute 
which  is  given  to  "  the  law  of  the  mind,"  and  that  which  is 
ascribed  to  "  the  law  of  the  Spirit."  For,  in  Romans  vii, 
23,  "  the  law  of  the  mind"  is  said  to  be  overcome  in  com- 
bat by  "  the  law  of  the  members,"  from  which  event,  the  man 
"  is  brought  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin."  And  in  Ro- 
mans viii,  2,  "  the  law  of  the  Spirit"  is  said  to  make  the 
man  "  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death ;"  that  is,  it  is 
stronger  and  superior  in  the  conflict  against  "  the  law  of  the 
members  ;"  and,  when  the  latter  is  conquered  and  overcome, 
the  law  of  the  Spirit"  delivers  the  man  from  the  captivity 
into  which  he  had  been  brought  by  the  force  of  "the  law  of 
the  members." 

(6.)  St.  Augustine  was  compelled  to  pervert  the  phrase, 
"  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin,"  and  to  give  it  the  meaning  of 
our  primeval  state  in  Adam^  from  whom  we  are  born  cor- 
rupt and  under  the  captivity  of  sin  and  Satan,  when,  in  this 
passage,  the  apostle  is  not  treating  on  that  captivity,  but  on 
another,  which  is  produced  from  it,  that  is,  by  "  the  law  of 
the  members,"  which  we  have  contracted  from  Adam,  wa- 
ging war  against  "  the  law  of  the  mind,"  overcoming  it,  and 
bringing  man,  hj  his  own  act^  under  captivity  to  the  law  of 
sin.   For  we  have  the  former  captivity  originally  from  Adam, 


DISSERTATION". 


445 


but  we  bring  down  the  latter  upon  ourselves  hy  our  own  act. 
Even  if  the  discourse  of  the  apostle  had  referred  to  our  pri- 
meval state,  jet,  because  the  regenerate  have  received  remis- 
sion of  sin  and  are  endowed  with  the  spirit  of  the  grace  of 
Christ,  they  cannot  be  said  to  be  captives  under  sin.  For, 
though  the  fuel  has  not  been  extinguished,  yet  the  power  of 
commanding,  and  of  subjecting  iis  to  itself,  is  taken  away 
from  sin  by  the  power  of  regeneration. 

(7.)  He  is  forced  to  torture  the  votive  exclamation  in  the 
24:th  verse,  to  a  desire  different  from  that  on  which  the 
apostle  is  here  treating,  and  with  which  the  thanksgiving  in 
the  25th  verse  does  not  correspond.  For,  in  this  passage, 
St.  Paul  treats  upon  the  desire  by  which  the  man  requests  to 
be  delivered  from  the  dominion  of  sin,  which  he  calls  "  the 
body  of  death;"  and  St.  Augustine  is  compelled  [by  the 
scheme  of  interpretation  which  he  had  adopted]  to  explain 
in  reference  to  the  desire  by  which  he  desires  to  be  liberated 
from  this  mortal  body,  and  when  that  event  occurs,  he  will 
at  once  be  free  from  the  concupiscence  of  sin.  A  thanksgiv- 
ing, however,  seems  [in  this  case]  to  be  most  unadvisedly  sub- 
joined to  the  votive  desire,  before  the  fruition  of  the  thing 
which  is  said  to  be  wished  ;  yet  this  is  done  in  this  passage, 
according  to  the  interpretation  of  St.  Augustine. 

(8.)  Lastly,  St.  Augustine  is  forced  to  assign  a  double  ser- 
vitude to  a  regenerate  man — the  one^  as  he  serves  God — the 
other^  as  he  serves  sin ;  and  this  in  contradiction  to  the  ex- 
press declaration  of  Christ — "  ISTo  man  can  at  one  time  serve 
two  masters."  It  is  objected,  "  that  in  a  different  respect,  and 
according  to  his  different  parts,  man  is  said  to  serve  God^  and 
to  serve  sin  ;"  but  this  remark  does  not  clear  this  opinion  from 
the  stain  with  which  it  is  aspersed,  (i.)  Because  the  Scrip- 
tures are  unacquainted  with  that  distinction,  when  they  are 
speaking  about  regenerate  persons  ;  let  a  passage  to  the  con- 
trary be  produced,  (ii.)  Because,  if  even  the  flesh  war  against 
the  Spirit  or  the  mind  by  lusting ;  yet  a  man  cannot  be  said, 
solely  on  account  of  this  resistance  and  warfare,  "  with  his 
flesh  to  serve"  sin,  or  "  the  law  of  sin  ;"  for,  with  St.  Augus- 
tine, these  two  are  the  same  things. 


4A6 


JAMES  ABMINIUS. 


He  is  likewise  compelled  to  use  the  word,  "  the  mind,"  for 
the  regenerated  part  of  man^  for  the  man  so  far  as  he  is  regene- 
rate, in  opposition  to  Scripture  usage  and  phraseology,  as  we 
have  explained  in  the  first  part  of  this  treatise. 

These  appear  to  me  most  equitable  reasons  for  rejecting  the 
latter  opinion  of  St.  Augustine,  and  for  appealing  from  him 
when  asleep  to  St.  Augustine  in  his  waking  moments.  I  have 
no  doubt  that  he  would  also  have  abandoned  this  his  second 
opinion,  had  he  taken  into  his  consideration  the  arguments 
which  are  now  adduced,  especially  when  he  had  perceived  the 
explication  of  the  whole  chapter  to  be  so  suitable  and  proper, 
and  impossible  to  be  wrested  in  any  point  by  the  Pelagians 
for  proving  their  doctrine. 

2.  Our  divines  have  fallen  into  some  of  these  errors  with 
which  we  have  charged  the  opinion  of  St.  Augustine,  such  as 
the  following  :  They  are  forced  to  interpret  "  to  be  carnal," 
and  "  to  be  sold  under  sin,"  in  a  manner  very  different  from 
that  which  the  meaning  of  the  apostle  will  allow ;  they  call 

sin  that  dwelleth  in  a  man,"  "  sin  existing  within^''  thus  dis- 
tinguishing it  from  reigning  sin  ;  they  assert  that  "  the  law  of 
the  mind"  signifies  "the  law  of  the  Spirit ;"  they  exj^lain  in 
a  corrupt  manner  the  votive  exclamation  ;  and,  lastly,  they  at- 
tribute a  two-fold  servitude  to  a  regenerate  man.  In  addition 
to  these  mistakes,  they  fall  into  others  which  are  peculiar  to 
their  interpretation,  but  which  are  agreeable  neither  to  the 
meaning  of  the  apostle  in  this  chapter,  nor  to  the  rest  of  the 
Scriptures,  for, 

(1.)  They  are  compelled  to  interpret  that  which,  according 
to  the  meaning  of  the  apostle,  belongs  to  the  continuous  state 
of  this  man,  as  if  it  hapj)ened  to  him  only  occasionally^  in  con- 
tradiction to  the  express  phraseology  of  the  apostle,  who  says, 
"  The  good  that  I  would,  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil  which  I  would 
not,  that  I  do."  This  phraseology  is  by  no  means  in  accord- 
ance with  the  signification  by  which  any  one  is  said  occasion- 
ally to  perpetrate  evil  and  to  do  good,  as  we  have  already  ren- 
dered very  manifest. 

(2.)  They  are  under  the  necessity  of  interpreting  the  phrase, 
"  The  good  that  I  would,  I  do  not"  by  "  I  do  not  good  in  the 


DISSERTATION. 


perfection  in  which  I  ought,"  or,  "  I  do  not  so  much  good  as 
it  is  my  will  to  do  ;"  jet  neither  of  these  explanations  is  agree- 
able to  the  meaning  of  the  apostle,  as  we  have  previously 
seen. 

(3.)  They  broadly  assert,  that  while  the  regenerate  are  ac- 
tually committing  sin,  they  are  unwilling  to  commit  sin  in  the 
very  act  of  sinning,  in  opposition  to  the  whole  of  the  Scrip- 
tures and  to  the  nature  of  actual  sin  itself,  which,  if  it  be  not 
voluntary,  ceases  to  be  sin. 

(4.)  They  are  compelled  to  say  contradictory  things  about 
this  man.  For  they  take  away  from  sin,  which  exists  within 
him,  the  dominion  over  him ;  and  yet  they  attribute  to  it  a 
habitation  or  indwelling,  and  they  ascribe  such  force  and  effi- 
cacy to  it,  that  it  perpetrates  evil  itself  in  the  man  in  opposi- 
tion to  his  will,  and  brings  him  into  captivity  to  the  law  of 
sin.  These  are  most  undoubted  effects  indeed  of  sin  reigning 
and  exercising  dominion. 

(5.)  Lastly,  as  there  are  many  passages  of  Scripture,  which 
attribute  to  the  regenerate  the  willing  of  good^  a  delight  in 
the  law  of  God^  and  things  of  a  similar  kind,  they  are  com- 
pelled to  interpret  those  passages  by  this  restrictive  particle, 
"  after  the  inward  man,"  while,  in  the  rest  of  the  Scriptures, 
such  attributes  are  simply  ascribed  to  a  regenerate  man,  be- 
cause they  have  the  predominance  in  him.  But  it  is  not  ne- 
cessary, at  this  time,  to  repeat  all  those  things  which  we  have 
before  written  and  proved  against  that  opinion. 

3.  But  the  opinion  which  I  have  undertaken  to  explain,  is 
plain  and  perspicuous,  under  no  necessity  to  affix  any  thing 
to  the  phraseology  of  the  apostle,  or  to  impinge  against  any 
other  portions  of  holy  writ.  This  may  be  perceived  at  one 
g  lance,  by  him  who  will  cast  his  eyes  upon  these  two  things, 
that  the  man  who  is  the  subject  of  the  present  investigation, 
is  said  to  be  placed  imder  the  dominion  of  sin  and  under  the 
law^  that  is,  he  is  one  in  whom  the  law  has  discharged  its  en- 
tire office. 

(1.)  For,  as  he  is  'placed  under  the  dominion  of  sin^  the 
fo  Uowing  affirmations  are  correctly  and  "without  any  contor- 
tion made  concerning  him :  "  He  is  sold  under  sin ;  he  does 


us 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


that  which  he  wills  not,  and  omits  that  which  he  wills ;  sin 
dwells  in  him,  and  in  his  flesh  dwelleth  no  good  thing ;  he 
cannot  attain  to  the  performance  of  that  which  is  good  ;  he 
does  not  perform  that  which  is  good,  but  he  perpetrates  evil ; 
evil  is  present  with  him  ;  the  law  of  his  members  wages  war 
with  the  law  of  his  mind  and  overcomes  it,  and  renders  the 
man  a  captive  under  the  law  of  sin  which  he  has  in  his  mem- 
bers ;  and,  being  thus  entangled  and  bound  down,  he  is  de- 
tained by  the  body  of  this  death,  (that  is,  bj  the  body  of  sin,) 
and  required  with  his  flesh  to  serve  the  law  of  sin." 

(2.)  But,  as  he  is  said  to  he  placed  under  the  law,  the  fol- 
lowing affirmations  belong  to  him  correctly  and  without  any 
contortion :  "  He  allows  not  (he  approves  not)  that  which  he 
does  ;  he  wills  that  which  he  does  not,  and  he  wills  not  that 
which  he  does  ;  he  consents  to  the  law  of  God  that  it  is  good ; 
it  is  no  longer  he  who  commits  evil ;  he  has  good  dwelling  in 
his  mind ;  the  good  that  he  wills  he  does  not,  but  the  evil 
which  he  wills  not,  that  he  does ;  he  delights  in  the  law  of 
God  after  the  inward  man  ;  with  the  law  of  his  mind  he  wa- 
ges war  against  the  law  of  his  members  ;  he  is  exceedingly  de- 
sirous of  deliverance ;  and  with  his  mind  he  serves  the  law  of 
God." 

!N^ay,  these  two  united  classes  of  attributes,  joined  as  they 
intimately  are,  in  the  text  of  the  apostle,  cannot  belong  to 
any  other  man  than  to  this  as  he  is  placed  under  the  law,  and 
at  the  same  time  under  the  dominion  of  sin.  So  far  from 
these  two  relations  not  being  capable  of  belonging  at  once  to 
the  same  man,  that  he  who  is  under  the  law  necessarily  en- 
dures the  dominion  of  sin,  that  is,  the  law  is  too  weak  to  be 
able  to  release  and  liberate  the  sinner  from  the  tyranny  of  sin. 
This  is  the  subject  upon  which  the  apostle  treats  through  the 
whole  of  this  chapter,  and  points  it  out  in  the  person  of  that 
man  who  is  placed  under  the  law  in  a  mode  the  most  ex- 
cellent of  all,  that  is,  one  in  whom  the  law  has  fulfilled  not 
only  some  part  of  its  office,  (for  that  did  not  serve  the  purpose 
which  he  had  in  view,)  but  in  whom  the  law  had  discharged 
all  its  offices  and  acts  ;  lor  this  was  required  by  the  necessity 
of  the  cause  about  which  the  apostle  was  treating ;  because 


V 


DISSEETATION". 


449 


"  the  weakness  of  the  law"  could  not  be  taught  by  the  exam- 
ple of  him  who  had  not  within  himself  all  tfiose  things  which 
are  usually  effected  by  the  law.  For  the  Jews  might  have  al- 
ways objected  that  some  other  persons  had  made  still  further 
progress  through  the  power  and  efficacy  of  the  law. 

If  this  observation,  as  well  as  many  others,  be  diligently 
considered,  it  will  be  of  great  potency  in,  effecting  a  persuasion 
that  the  present  chapter  must  be  understood  as  relating  to  a 
man  who  is  under  the  law.  And  I  feel  fully  persuaded  with- 
in myself,  that  if  views  similar  to  these  had  entered  into  the 
minds  of  our  expositors,  when  they  explained  this  portion  of 
Scripture,  they  would  undoubtedly  have  interpreted  it  in  this 
manner  ;  for  such  were  their  piety  and  their  learning^  that  I 
cannot  bring  myself  to  feel  any  other  persuasion  than  this  con- 
cerning them.  But  it  frequently  happens,  that  the  fear  of 
falling  into  error  or  heresy,  if  any  passage  be  explained  in  a 
manner  different  from  that  generally  received,  hinders  those 
who  are  under  the  influence  of  such  a  fear  from  venturing  the 
more  diligently  to  inspect  such  passage,  and  to  consider  wheth- 
er it  may  not  be  explained  appropriately  and  agreeably  to  the 
analogy  of  faith,  even  by  that  mode  which  is  said  to  be  favor- 
able to  heresy. 

I  likewise  believe,  that  this  interpretation  of  mine  is  reject- 
ed by  many  persons  who  have  never  once  thought  on  the  mode 
in  which  the  Scriptures  define  that  man  whom  I  assert  to  be 
described  in  this  chapter.  If  they  had  earnestly  endeavored 
to  ascertain  this  point,  they  would  assuredly  have  discovered 
that  all  these  things  may  be  most  commodiously  explained 
concerning  a  man  who  is  under  the  law.  I  will  add,  as  the 
result  of  my  own  experience,  that  I  have  found  multitudes 
who  have  not  only  not  considered  with  sufficient  diligence, 
but  who  also  have  not  exhibited  any  desire  to  consider,  what 
these  names  and  epithets  properly  signify,  and  how  they  must 
be  accurately  distinguished  from  each  other — the  natural  man^ 
the  carnal  man^  the  outward  man^  the  old  man^  the  [animalis] 
sensual  man^  the  earthly  man^  the  worldly  man — also,  the 
spiritual  man^  the  heavenly  man^  the  inward  man^  the  new 
man^  the  illuminated  man^  the  regenerate  man,  &c.  The 


450 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


same  persons  also  have  not  manifested  any  inclination  to  dis- 
tinguish in  an  accurate  and  suitable  manner  between  the  acts 
and  operations  of  the  Spirit — when  making  use  of  the  law^ 
and  when  employing  the  gospel — when  preparing  a  home  or 
abode  for  himself^  and  when  actually  the  inhabitant  of  his 
own  temple — of  his  enlightening^  regenerating  and  sealing — 
of  his  bringing  men  to  Christy  uniting  them  to  Christ — and 
communicating  to  them  the  benefits  of  Christ — of  his  op- 
erating^ co-operating^  exciting^  aiding^  assisting^  and  con- 
firming or  strengthening — and  of  his  infusing  habits^  and 
jproducing  good  actions.  All  these  things  seem  to  me  to  be 
of  such  a  description  that  if  any  person  were,  without  a  con- 
sideration of  these  matters,  to  attempt  a  serious  and  solid  ex- 
planation of  those  things  of  which  the  apostle  is  treating  in 
this  chapter,  his  conduct  would  appear  to  me  like  that  of  a 
man  who  should  endeavor  to  construct  a  large  and  splendid 
edifice  without  stones  and  lime. 

4.  These  remarks  I  offer,  with  a  sincere  and  candid  mind, 
to  those  pious  and  learned  men,  and  those  eminent  servants 
of  Christ,  my  beloved  brethren  in  Christ  and  fellow-laborers 
in  the  work  of  the  Lord,  who  ought  ever  to  receive  Irom  me 
all  due  honor  and  deference,  to  be  read,  known,  judged,  and 
approved  or  disapproved  ;  and  I  request  and  most  earnestly 
beseech  of  them  only  one  thing,  in  the  name  of  our  common 
S  avior — that,  if  they  shall  discover  me  to  have  written  any 
thing,  in  the  preceding  treatise,  which  is  either  contrary  to  the 
analogy  of  faith  or  contrary  to  the  sense  and  meaning  of  the 
apostle,  they  will  admonish,  teach  and  instruct  me  about  it  in 
a  fraternal  manner.  If  they  find  any  such  matter,  I  testify, 
before  God,  that  I  will  not  only  lend  an  attentive  and  patient 
hearing  to  their  admonitions,  teaching  and  instruction,  but  I 
will  also  yield  them  full  compliance.  I  likewise  protest,  that 
if,  in  the  present  instance,  any  things  of  this  description  have 
escaped  from  me,  (for  we  all  know  but  in  part,)  I  consider 
them  as  not  written  and  as  not  spoken. 

But  if  they  shall  perceive  that  these  very  things  are  agreeable 
to  the  rest  of  the  Scriptures  and  conformable  to  the  mind  of 
the  apostle,  then  I  may  be  j)ermitted  to  request  and  entrea  t 


DISSERTATION. 


451 


from  them  that  they  will  grant  a  place  to  the  truth,  thus  point- 
ed out,  in  the  church  of  Christ,  which  is  the  pillar  and  groun^i 
of  the  truth. 

I  solemnly  engage,  that  there  is  no  cause  for  them  to  be 
afraid  lest  disturbances,  quarrels,  dissensions,  or  the  occasions 
of  such  great  evils,  in  the  Christian  church,  should  arise  from 
such  an  examination  and  conference.  They  will  have  to  dis- 
cuss the  subject  with  one — who  knows  in  part  how  to  dis- 
tinguish between  those  doctrines  which  are  simply  necessary 
and  fundamental,  and  those  which  have  not  in  them  an  equal 
necessity,  but  are  as  the  parts  of  a  superstructure  raised  on  a 
foundation — who,  next  to  the  necessity  for  truth,  thinks  all 
things  should  be  yielded  to  the  peace  of  the  churches — who 
can,  with  Christian  charity,  bear  with  those  that  differ  from 
him,  provided  they  do  not  attempt  "  to  have  dominion  over 
the  faith  of  other  persons" — who  is  not  desirous  with  an 
oflScious  hastiness  to  obtrude  on  the  public  either  his  own 
admissions,  or  those  of  other  persons,  which  had  been  con- 
fided to  each  other  for  the  sake  of  a  mutual  conference,  but 
who  knows  how  to  retain  them  faithfully,  and  has  skill 
enough  to  revolve  them  in  his  mind  for  nine  long  years,  ac- 
cording to  the  ancient  proverb,  "  One  day  is  the  disciple 
of  another ;  our  later  meditations  are  wiser  and  more  accu- 
rate than  our  early  ones ;  we  daily  grow  old  and  yet  are 
learning  many  things."  Lastly,  they  will  have  to  discuss 
the  subject  with  one  who  may  be  in  error,  but  who  cannot 
be  a  heretic,  and  whose  will  assuredly  it  is  not  to  he  one. 

Amicable,  fraternal,  and  placid  conferences  of  this  descrip- 
tion, instituted  between  professors  of  the  same  faith  and  of 
the  same  religion,  are  not  only  useful,  but  likewise  necessary 
to  the  churches  of  Christ,  for  the  further  investigation  of  the 
truth,  for  retaining  it  firmly  when  discovered,  and  for  boldly 
defending  it  against  adversaries.  From  these  friendly  confer- 
ences, we  may  discover  truth,  since  they  are  not  undertaken 
through  a  desire  for  victory,  or  for  the  sake  of  defending  some 
topic  which  had  been  formerly  conceived  and  adopted.  But 
from  those  others,  which  are  not  so  much  Christian  conferences^ 
as  vehement.^  hitter  and  vexatious  altercations^  and  which  we 


452 


JAMES  ARMmiUS. 


perceive  to  be  agitated  by  the  followers  aud  defenders  of 
different  religious  professions,  generally  ensues  the  result  tha* 
is  comprised  in  the  vulgar  proverb,  "  Truth  is  lost  in  the  midst 
of  their  wrangling."  Such  an  issue  is  no  ground  of  surprise 
when  the  very  method  and  circumstances  uf  the  altercation 
very  often  declare  that  the  whole  affair  was  at  its  commence- 
ment undertaken,  and  afterwards  prosecuted,  without  the 
spirit  of  truth,  charity  and  peace ;  and  that,  as  a  necessary 
consequence,  it  has  been  conducted  to  a  sad  catastrophe,  most 
lamentable  to  the  churches  of  Christ. 

And  let  no  man  rashly  persuade  himself,  that  as  long  as  the 
[visible]  church  shall  be  a  sojourner  in  this  world,  and  shall 
have,  in  the  midst  of  her,  unskillful,  infirm  and  wicked  per- 
sons, she  will  maintain  the  doctrine  of  Christ  so  correctly  as 
not  to  require  a  still  further  investigation  of  the  truth  from 
the  Scriptures,  which  are  the  inexhaustible  fountain  of  divine 
wisdom,  as  to  be  able  to  dispense  with  the  examination  of 
those  dogmas  which  are  built  up  as  a  superstructure  on  the 
foundation  of  the  Scriptures,  and  as  not  to  be  under  the  least 
necessity  of  confirming  and  defending  Christian  doctrine,  by 
the  force  and  weight  of  solid  arguments,  against  ancient  here- 
sies which  have  been  polished  up  after  a  new  method,  and 
against  novel  heresies  which  are  daily  springing  up  and  be- 
coming still  more  prevalent. 

It  is  not  an  act  of  arrogance  to  enter  upon  such  an  exercise 
and  employment  as  this,  but  it  is  an  act  of  true  and  solid 
piety  towards  God,  which  commands  and  prescribes  that,  as 
"  a  dispensation  of  the  gospel  has  been  committed  to  us,"  we 
ought  to  "  stir  up  the  gifts  of  God  which  are  in  us,"  to  study 
and  strive  to  augment  the  talents  which  have  been  divinely 
granted  to  us,  and,  with  a  pure  conscience  and  in  the  fear  of 
the  Lord,  to  discharge  the  duties  of  this  sacred  ministry,  to  the 
sanctfication  of  his  name,  the  building  up  and  edification  of 
the  church  of  Christ,  and  to  the  demolition  and  extirpation  of 
the  kingdom  of  Satan  and  of  Antichrist — which  may  the  God 
and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  vouchsafe  to  grant  to  us, 
through  and  for  the  sake  of  his  only  begotten  Son,  and  in  the 
power  -end  efficacy  of  his  Spirit.  Amen. 


A  LETTEK 

ADDEE88ED  TO 

HIPPOLYTUS  A  COLLIBUS, 

AMBA38ADOB  FBOM  THE  MOST  rLLTTSTRIOTTS  PEINCE,  THE  ELECTOK  PALATIKE,  FKEDKEICK  IV, 
TO  THE  SEVEN  UNITE  D  DUTCH  PB0VIN0E8  I 
BY 

THE  EEY.  JAMES  AEMTOIUS,  D.  D., 

OF  OUDEWATER  IN  HOLLAND, 
AN  EMINENT  PE0FE8S0K  OP  SACKED  THEOLOGY. 

LIKEWISE, 

CEETAIIT  AETICLES, 

TO  BE  SUBJECTED  TO  A  DILIGENT  EXAMINATION,  BECAUSE  SOME  C0NTR0VEE3Y  HAS  AEISEN 
ABOUT  THEM  AMONG  THE  PEOFE880E8  OP  THE  EEFOEMED  EELIGION: 
IN  WHICH 

AEMINIU8  MOEE  FULLY  DECLAEES  HIS  SENTIMENTS  ON  THE  PRINCIPAL 
AETICLES  OP  CHRISTIAN  DOCTEINB. 


INTRODUCTON. 


To  THE  Eeader  : 

It  cannot  be  a  matter  of  secrecy  to  you,  how  vaiious, 
uncertain  and  prodigious  the  rumors  are  which  have  been 
circulated  through  Holland,  Germany,  and  Great  Britain, 
concerning  James  Aeminius,  Professor  of  Divinity ;  and  in 
what  manner  (I  do  not  stop  to  discuss  with  how  much  zeal) 
some  persons  accuse  this  man  of  schism  and  others  of  heresy, 
some  charge  him  with  the  crime  of  Pelagianism  and  others 
brand  him  with  the  black  mark  of  Socinianism,  while  all  of 
them  execrate  him  as  the  pest  of  the  reformed  churches.  On 
this  account,  those  persons  who  feel  a  regard  for  the  memory 
of  this  learned  man,  and  who,  not  without  good  reason,  are 
desirous  of  maintaining  his  reputation  and  character,  and  of 
defending  him  from  those  atrocious  imputations  and  virulent 
calumnies,  have  lately  published  some  of  his  erudite  lucubra- 
tions, which  are  polished  with  the  greatest  care.  They  have 
thus  placed  them  within  the  reach  of  the  public,  that  the 
reader,  who  is  eager  in  the  pursuit  after  truth,  may  more  easily 
and  happily  form  his  judgment  about  the  station  which  Ar- 
minius  is  entitled  to  hold  among  posterity,  not  from  fallacious 
rumors  and  the  criminations  of  the  malevolent,  but  from  au- 
thentic documents,  as  if  from  the  ingenuous  confession  itself 
of  the  accused  speaking  openly  in  his  own  cause,  and  mildly 
replying  to  the  crimes  with  which  he  has  been  charged. 

With  this  object  in  view,  the  friends  of  Arminius  have 
published,  as  separate  treatises,  his  "  Modest  Examination  of 
a  Pamphlet^  written  some  years  ago  ly  that  very  learned 


456 


JAME3  ABMDnnS. 


Divine^  William  PerJcins,  on  Predestination :  To  which  is 
added,  an  Analysis  of  the  Ninth  Chajpter  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans^''  and  bis  ''^Dissertation  on  the  true  and  genuine 
Meaning  of  the  Seventh  Chajpter  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans^ 

But  these  two  works  are  neither  sufficient  nor  satisfactory 
to  many  dispositions  that  are  [ciiriosis']  prying  or  \_sagacibus'] 
that  indulge  in  surmises,  and  to  other  eminent  men  who 
abound  with  an  acrimonious  shrewdness  of  judgment ;  be- 
cause they  embrace  neither  the  whole  nor  the  chief  \_aporias'] 
of  the  perplexing  difficulties  of  James  Arminius.  Some  of 
those  who  attended  his  Academical  Lectures,  affirm  that  he 
frequently  uttered  novel  and  astounding  paradoxes  about 
other  points  of  the  orthodox  doctrine  [than  are  contained  in 
the  two  works  just  mentioned].  Other  persons  relate,  as  a 
great  secret,  that  Arminius  addressed  A  Letter"  to  Hippol- 
ytus  a  Collibus,  in  which  he  more  fully  discloses  his  own 
pestiferous  sentiments ;  and  that  "  Certain  Articles"  are 
circulated  in  a  private  manner,  in  which,  while  treating  upon 
several  of  the  chief  heads  of  orthodox  theology,  he  introdu- 
ces his  own  poisonous  dogmas. 

In  this  state  of  affairs,  we  may  be  permitted  to  give  some 
assistance  to  an  absent  person,  nay,  to  one  who  is  dead,  and  to 
offer  a  reply  to  the  accusations  and  criminations  which  we 
have  now  specified,  by  the  evidence  of  witnesses  who  are 
worthy  of  credit,  and  by  the  publication  of  the  very  docu- 
ments which  we  are  thus  challenged  to  produce.  Perhaps, 
by  this  means,  we  shall  be  able  to  remove  those  sinister  insinu- 
ations and  suspicions.  We  shall,  at  least,  meet  the  wishes  of 
a  number  of  persons,  and  shall  terminate  the  anxieties  of 
several  minds  that  have  till  now  been  in  a  state  of  suspense. 

Accept,  therefore,  candid  reader,  of  that  "  Letter"  about 
which  so  many  reports  have  been  circulated,  and  which  was 
addressed  to  Ilippolytus  a  Collibus,  Ambassador  from  Prince 
Frederick  IV,  the  Elector  Palatine. 

Accept,  likewise,  of  those  "Articles"  which  are  to  be  dili- 
gently examined  and  pondered,  and  which  give  us  the  senti- 
ments of  Arminius  on  the  One  and  the  Triune  God,  the 


INTRODUCTION. 


467 


Attributes  of  God^  the  Deity  of  the  JSon,  Predestination  and 
Divine  Providenv\  Original  Sin^  Free  Will,  the  Grace  of 
God,  Christ  and  his  ^atisfactif.n,  Justification,  I  aith  and 
Hepentanee,  Regt^neration,  the  Baptism  of  Infants,  the  LordU^ 
Sapper,  and  0,i  Magistracy,  Accurately  c  nsider  and  can- 
didly judge  whatever  he  thought  necessary  to  be  amended  or 
to  be  rendered  more  complete  in  the  doctrine  of  the  reformed 
churches. 

The  writings  of  this  man  require  no  commendations  from 
me,  or  from  any  other  person :  There  is  no  need  of  ivy  in 
this  instance,  for  [merx]  these  productions  will  insure  appro- 
bation.* 


*  I  hare  translated  this  "  Introduction"  from  a  scarce  8vo  copy,  printed  at  Delft  in  1613.  It 
is  alltLat  affords  us  any  thing  in  the  form  of  an  Introduction  to  the  following  "Letter," 

80  TOL.  n. 


A  LETTER, 

BY 


THE  EEY.  JAMES  AKMINIUS,  D.  D., 


A  NATIVE  OF  OUDEWATEB,  IN  HOLLANP. 


to  his  excellency,  the  noble  lord,  hippolytus  a  colltbus, 
ambassador  from  the  most  illustrious  prince,  the  elec- 
tor palatine,  to  the  seven  united  dutch  provinces,  james 
arminius  wishkth  health  and  success.  , 

Most  Honorable  Sir: 

When  I  was  lately  admitted  to  a  conversation  with  you,  you 
had  the  kindness  to  intimate  to  me  the  reports  which  you 
understood  had  been  circulated  at  Heidelberg  about  my  hete- 
rodoxy in  certain  articles  of  our  faith  ;  and  you  gave  me  this 
information,  not  only  that  you  might  yourself  hear  from  me 
personally  the  whole  truth  about  the  matter,  but,  much  more, 
that,  by  the  intervention  of  your  good  offices,  the  suspicions 
concerning  me,  which  have  been  so  unhandsomely  conceived 
and  propagated,  might  be  removed  from  the  minds  of  other 
persons,  since  this  is  a  course  which  truth  requires.  I  endeav- 
ored at  that  interview,  with  diligence  and  seriousness  to  com- 
ply with  your  obliging  request,  and  by  returning  a  frank  and 
open  reply  to  each  of  those  questions  which  your  excellency 
proposed,  I  instantly  disclosed  my  sentiments  about  those  sev- 
eral Articles.  For,  in  addition  to  my  being  bound  to  do  this, 
by  my  duty  as  a  Christian  man,  and  especially  as  a  divine,-. 


460 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


such  a  course  of  conduct  was  demanded  from  me  bj  the  great 
candor,  condescension  and  benevolence  which  you  exhibited 
towards  me. 

But  my  explanation  was  so  agreeable  to  your  excellency, 
(which  I  ascribe  to  an  act  of  the  divine  Benignity  towards  me,) 
as  to  induce  you,  on  that  occasion,  to  think  it  requisite  that 
those  propositions  of  mine  should  be  committed  to  writing 
and  transmitted  to  you,  not  only  for  the  purpose  of  being  thus 
enabled  the  more  certainly  and  firmly  to  form  your  own  judg- 
ment al)0ut  the  matter  when  you  had  maturely  reflected  upon 
it,  but  also  w^ith  the  design  of  communicating  my  written  an- 
swers to  others,  that  they  might  confute  the  calumny  and  vin- 
dicate my  innocence.  Having  followed  the  counsel  of  your 
prudence,  and  firmly  relying  on  the  same  hope,  I  now  accede 
to  your  further  wishes,  in  this  letter  ;  and  I  entreat  your  ex- 
cellency to  have  the  goodness  to  peruse  its  contents  with  the 
same  candor  and  equanimity  as  were  displayed  when  you  lis- 
tened to  their  delivery.  Unless  my  mind  greatly  deceives  me, 
your  excellency  will  find  in  this  letter  that  which  will  notonly 
be  able  to  obliterate,  but  also  completely  to  eradicate,  every 
unjust  suspicion  concerning  me,  from  the  minds  of  those  good 
men  who  know  that  every  one  is  the  best  interpreter  of  his 
own  sentiments,  and  that  the  utmost  credit  is  to  be  given  to 
him  who  sacredly,  and  in  the  presence  of  God,  bears  testimo- 
ny to  his  own  meaning. 

The  articles  of  doctrine  about  which  your  excellency  made 
inquiries,  were,  as  far  as  my  memory  serves  me,  the  following: 
the  Divinity  of  the  Son  of  God^  Providence^  Div  ne  Predestina- 
tion^ Grace  and  Free  Will^  and  Justification.  Beside  these,  you 
inquired  about  the  things  which  concerned  our  opinions,  in 
answer  to  the  interrogatories  of  the  States  of  Holland,  con- 
cerning the  mode  of  holding  the  proposed  synod.  But  as  the 
latter  relate  to  that  most  eminent  man,  the  Eev.  John  Uyten- 
bogard,  minister  of  the  church  at  the  Hague,  as  much  as  to 
me,  I  leave  them  to  be  explained  by  him,  whose  residence  is 
mu<  h  nearer  to  that  of  your  excellency. 

With  regard  to  all  these  doctrinal  Articles,  I  confidently 
declare  that  I  have  never  taught  any  thing,  either  in  the  church 


A  LETTER 


461 


or  in  the  uriviersitj,  which  contravenes  the  sacred  writings^ 
that  ought  to  be  with  us  the  sole  rule  of  tliiiiking  and  of 
speaking,  or  which  is  opposed  to  the  Dutch  Confession  of  Faith, 
or  to  the  Heidelberg  Catechism,  that  are  our  stricter  formu- 
laries of  consent.  In  proof  of  this  assertion  I  might  produce, 
as  most  clear  and  unquestionable  testimonies,  the  theses  which 
I  have  composed  on  these  several  Articles,  and  which  have 
been  discussed  as  Public  Disputations  in  the  university  ;  but 
as  those  theses  are  not  entirely  in  reaciness  for  every  one,  and 
can  be  with  dilficulty  transmitted,  I  will  now  treat  upon  each 
of  them  specially,  as  far  as  I  shall  conceive  it  necessary. 

I.     THE  DIVINITY  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD. 

Concerning  the  divinity  of  the  Son  of  God,  I  have  taught, 
and  still  teach,  that  the  Father  has  never  been  without  his 
Word  and  his  Spirit,  but  that  the  Word  aiid  the  Spirit  are  not 
to  be  considered  in  the  Father  under  the  notion  of  properties, 
as  wisdom,  goodness,  justice,  or  power,  but  under  that  of  really 
existing  persons,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  he^  to  live,  to  under- 
stand, to  will,tohe  capable,  and  to  do  or  act,  all  of  which,  when 
united,  are  indications  and  proofs  of  a  person,  but  that  they 
are  so  in  the  Father  as  to  be  also/'ro?7^  the  Father,  in  a  certain 
order  of  origin,  not  through  collaterality,  to  be  referred  to  the 
Father,  and  that  they  are  from  the  Father  neither  by  creation 
nor  by  decision  but  by  a  most  wonderful  and  inexplicable  internal 
emanation,  which,  with  respect  to  the  Son,  the  ancient  church 
called  generation,  but  with  respect  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  was  de- 
nominated spiration  or  breathing,  a  term  required  by  the  very 
[etymon  of  the]  word  spirit.  But  about  this  breathing,  I  do 
not  interpose  njy  judgment — whether  it  is  from  the  Father 
and  the  Son,  as  the  Latin  fathers  express  themselves,  or  from 
the  Father  through  the  Son,  as  the  Greek  fathers  prefer  to 
define  it,  because  this  matter,  I  confess,  far  surpasses  my  ca- 
pacity. If,  on  any  subject,  we  ought  to  think  and  speak 
with  sobriety,  in  ray  opinion,  it  must  be  on  this. 

Since  these  are  my  sentiments  on  the  divinity  of  the  Son 
of  God  J  no  reason  could  exist  why,  on  this  point,  I  should 


462 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


endure  the  shafts  of  calumny.  Yet  this  slander  was  first  fab- 
ricated and  spread  through  the  whole  of  Germany  by  one 
in  whom  such  conduct  was  exceedingly  indecorous ;  because 
he  was  my  pupil,  and  ought  to  have  refrained  from  that 
course,  having  been  taught  by  his  own  painful  experience 
that  he  either  possessed  an  unhappy  memory,  or  was  of 
doubtful  credit ;  for  he  had  previously  been  convicted  of  a 
similar  calumny,  and  had  openly  confessed  his  fault  before 
me,  and  requested  my  forgiveness.  But,  as  I  learned  from 
a  certain  manuscript  which  was  transmitted  to  Leyden  out 
of  Germany,  and  which  the  same  youth  had  delivered  to 
the  Heidelberg  divines,  he  took  the  groundwork  of  his  cal- 
umny from  those  things  which  I  had  publicly  taught  con- 
corning  the  economy  of  our  salvation,  as  administered  by  the 
Father  through  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  the  explan- 
ation of  this  economy,  I  had  said  "  that  we  must  have  a  dili- 
gent regard  to  this  orderj  which  the  Scriptures  in  every  part 
most  religiously  observe  ;  and  that  we  must  distinctly  consider 
what  things  are  attributed  as  peculiar  to  the  Father  in  this 
matter,  what  to  the  Son,  and  what  to  the  Holy  Spirit." 

After  this,  some  other  persons  seized  upon  a  diiferent  occasion 
for  the  same  calumny,  from  my  having  said  that  the  Son  of  God 
was  not  correctly  called  Auro^cog-,  "very  God,"  in  the  same  sense 
in  which  that  word  signifies  "God  from  himself." 

This  audacious  inclination  for  calumniating  was  promoted 
by  the  circumstance  of  my  having  explained  in  a  different  man- 
ner, certain  passages  of  the  Old  and  Xew  Testament,  which 
have  been  usually  adduced  to  establish  the  consubstantiality 
or  the  coessentiality  of  the  trinity.  But  I  can  with  ease  in  a 
moment  shew,  from  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment themselves,  from  the  whole  of  antiquity,  and  from  the 
sentiments  of  the  ancient  church,  both  Greek  and  Latin,  as 
well  as  from  the  testimony  of  our  own  divines,  that  nothing 
can  be  deduced  from  those  alleged  misinterpreted  passages, 
which  is  with  the  least  semblance  of  probability,  adverse  to 
the  sound  and  orthodox  faith.  In  his  able  defence  of  Calvin, 
against  the  treatise  of  Hunnius,  entitled  "  Calvin  Judaizing," 
the  learned  Para^us  has  taught  that  this  last  occasion  was  seiz- 


A  LETTER. 


463 


ed  upon  in  vain ;  and  he  has  liberated  me  from  the  necessity 
of  this  service. 

To  spend  any  time  in  confuting  the  first  slander,  which  was 
circulated  by  the  young  student,  would  not  repay  my  trouble. 
Those  who  know  that  the  Father  in  the  Son  hath  reconciled 
the  world  unto  himself,  and  administers  the  word  of  reconcil- 
iation through  the  Spirit,  know,  likewise,  that,  in  the  dispen- 
sation of  salvation,  an  order  must  be  considered  among  the 
persons  of  the  Trinity,  and  their  attributes  must  not  be  con- 
founded, unless  they  be  desirous  of  falling  into  the  heresy  of 
the  Patripassionists. 

Respecting  the  second  occasion,  which  concerns  the  word 
Auro^sog-,  "  very  God,"  an  answer  somewhat  more  labored  must 
be  undertaken,  because  there  are  not  a  few  persons  who  are  of 
a  contrary  opinion,  and  yet  our  church  does  not  consider  such 
persons  as  holding  wrong  sentiments  concerning  the  trinity. 
This  is  the  manner  in  which  they  propound  their  doctrine. 

Because  the  essence  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  is  one, 
and  because  it  has  its  origin  from  no  one,  therefore,  in  this  re- 
spect, the  Son  is  correctly  denominated  Avrokog-^  that  is,  God 
from  JiimselfP 

But  I  reply,  "  The  essence  of  the  Son  is  from  no  one,  or  is 
from  himself,"  is  not  the  same  as  "  the  Son  is  from  himself, 
or  from  no  one."  For,  to  speak  in  a  proper  and  formal  man- 
ner, the  Son  is  not  an  essence,  but  having  his  essence  by  a 
certain  mode  Auro^^or  of  being  or  existence. 

They  rejoin — "  The  Son  may  be  considered  in  two  respects, 
"  as  he  is  the  Son,  and  as  he  is  God.  As  Tie  is  the  Son,  he  is 
from  the  Father,  and  has  his  essence  from  the  Father.  But 
as  he  is  God,  he  has  his  essence  from  himself  or  from  no  one." 
But  the  latter  of  these  expressions  is  the  most  correct ;  for  to 
have  his  essence  from  himself  implies  a  contradiction. 

I  reply,  I  admit  this  distinction ;  but  it  is  extended  much 
fm'ther  than  is  allowable.  For  as  he  is  Godj  he  has  the  divine 
essence.  As  he  is  the  Son,  he  has  it  from  the  Father.  That 
is,  by  the  word  "  God,"  is  signified,  generally,  that  which  has 
the  divine  essence  without  any  certain  mode  of  subsistence. 
But,  by  the  word  "  the  Son,"  is  signified  a  certain  mode  of 


464 


JAMES  ARMINIUS 


having  the  divine  essence,  which  is  through  communication 
from  the  Father,  that  is,  through  generation. 

Let  these  double  ternaries  be  taken  into  consideration,  which 
are  opposed  to  each  other,  in  one  series, 

(To  have  Deity —        To  have  Deity  from  the  Father —        To  have  Deitrj^from  no  one — \ 
To  BB  God,  To  be  the  Son,  To  bb  the  Fathbe,  / 

and  it  will  be  evident,  that  among  themselves  they  mutually 
correspond  with  each  other,  thus :  "  to  have  Deity,"  and  "  to 
be  God" — "  to  have  Deity  from  the  Father,"  and  "  to  be  the 
Son" — "  to  have  Deity  from  no  one,"  and  "  to  be  the  Father" — ■ 
are  consentaneous,  though  under  the  word  "  Father,"  as  an 
affirmative,  that  is  not  signified  which  has  its  essence  from  no 
one ;  for  this  is  signified  by  the  word  "  ingenitus^  inwardly 
born,  which  is  attributed  to  the  Father,  though  not  with  strict- 
ness, but  only  to  signify  that  the  Father  has  not  his  essence  by 
the  mode  of  generation.  But  the  word  "  father,"  by  its  own 
force  and  meaning  is  conclusive  on  this  point :  For  where 
order  is  established,  it  is  necessary  that  a  beginning  be  made 
from  some  first  person  or  thing,  otherwise  there  will  be  confu- 
sion proceeding  onwards  ad  infinitum.  But,  with  respect  to 
origin,  he  who  is  the  first  in  this  order  has  his  origin  from  no 
one  ;  he  who  is  the  second,  has  his  origin  from  the  first ;  he 
who  is  the  third  has  his  origin  from  the  first  and  the  second, 
or  from  the  first  through  the  second.  Were  not  this  the  real 
state  of  the  matter ;  there  would  be  a  collaterality,  which 
would  make  as  many  Gods  as  there  were  collateral  persons 
laid  down  ;  since  the  unity  of  the  Deity  in  the  trinity  is  de- 
fended against  the  Anti-trinitarians  solely  by  the  relation  of 
origin  and  of  order  according  to  origin. 

But  til  at  it  may  evidently  appear  what  were  the  sentiments 
of  antiquity  about  this  matter,  I  will  here  adduce  from  the 
ancient  fathers,  both  of  the  Greek  and  Latin  church,  some 
passages  which  are  applicable  to  this  subject. 

BASIL  THE  GREAT. 

According  to  the  habit  of  causes  to  those  things  which  aie 
from  them,  we  say  that  the  Father  has  precedence  before  the 
Son.  {Ever,  lib,  1.) 


A  LETTER. 


465 


• — because  the  Son  has  his  [princ{^{um~\  source  from  the  Fa- 
ther. According  to  this,  the  Father  is  the  greater,  as  the 
cause  and  the  source.  Wherefore  our  Lord  also  has  said,  *'  Mj 
Father  is  greater  than  I,"  that  is,  because  He  is  the  Father. 
But  what  other  signification  can  the  word  father"  liave, 
than  the  cause  and  theheginning oi  Him  who  is  begotten  from 
Him?  (Ihid.) 

The  Father  is  the  root  and  the  fountain  of  the  Son  and  of 
the  Huly  Spirit.  {Discourse  against  the  Sabellians  and 
Arius.) 

When  I  have  said  "  one  essence,"  I  do  not  understand  two 
[persons]  distinguished  from  one,  but  the  Son  subsisting  from 
[princijjio]  the  source  of  the  Father,  not  the  Father  and  Son 
from  one  superior  essence.  For  we  do  not  call  them  "  brothers," 
but  we  confess  them  to  be  "  the  Father  and  the  Son."  But 
essence  is  identity,  because  the  Son  is  from  the  Father,  not 
made  by  command,  but  begotten  from  nature ;  not  divided 
from  the  Father,  but  [manente  jperfecto^  'perfects  i^elucens] 
while  He  remains  perfect,  reflecting  perfectly  back  again  the 
light.  But  that  you  may  not  be  able  to  charge  these  our  as- 
sertions against  us  as  a  crime,  and  lest  you  should  say,  "  He 
preaches  two  gods ;  he  announces  a  multitude  of  deities;"  there 
are  not  two  gods,  neitiier  are  there  two  fathers.  He  who  pro- 
duces two  [principia'j  original  sources,  preaches  two  gods. 
{IMd.) 

The  way  of  the  knowledge  of  God  is,  by  one  Spirit,  through 
one  Son,  to  one  Father.  And,  on  the  contrary,  natural  good- 
ness, natural  sanctification,  and  royal  dignity  [transit]  are 
transmitted  from  the  Father,  through  the  only  begotten  Son, 
to  the  Spirit.  Thus  we  confess  the  persons  [in  the  Godhead] 
and  at  the  same  time  the  pious  doctrine  [IfonarchieB]  of  the 
unity  is  not  undermined.  {On  the  Holy  Sjjirit^  cap.  18.) 

GREGORY  NAZIANZEN. 

The  [esse]  essence  is  common  and  equal  to  the  Son  with  the 
Father,  though  the  Son  has  it  from  the  Father.  {Fourth  Dis- 
course on  Theology) 


466 


JAMES  ARMINHJS. 


How  is  it  possible  for  the  same  thing  to  he  greater  than 
itself  and  yet  equal  to  itself?  Is  it  not,  therefore,  plain,  that 
the  word  "  greater,"  which  is  attributed  to  the  Father  in  refer- 
ence to  the  Son,  must  be  referred  to  cause  ;  but  the  word 
"  equal,"  which  is  attributed  to  the  Son,  as  to  his  equality  with 
the  Father,  must  be  referred  to  nature  ?  {Ihid.) 

It  may  indeed  be  trid^  said,  but  not  therefore  so  honorably^ 
that,  "  with  regard  to  the  humanity,  the  Father  is  greater  than 
the  Son  For  what  is  there  wonderful  in  God  being  greater 
than  man  ?  {Ihid.) 

AMBROSE. 

Though  Christ  has  redeemed  us,  yet  "  all  things  are  of 
God,"  because  from  him  is  all  the  paternity.  It  is,  therefore, 
of  necessity  that  the  person  of  the  Father  [jpTCBferri]  have  the 
precedence.  {On  2  Cor.  v,  18.) 

Consult  also  his  remarks  On  1  Cor.  xv. 

AUGUSTINE. 

If  that  which  begets  is  [jprincvpium']  the  original  source  of 
that  which  is  begotten,  the  Father  is  the  source  of  the  Son, 
because  he  begets  him.  {On  the  Trinity^  lib.  5,  cap.  14.) 

He  did  not  say  "  whom  the  Father  will  send  from  me,"  as 
He  said,  "  whom  I  will  send  from  the  Father,"  that  is,  plainly 
shewing  the  Father  to  be  the  source  of  the  entire  Deity. 
{lUd.  lib.  4,  cap.  10.) 

— ^Therefore  this  was  sa*d  concerning  the  Father:  "He 
doeth  the  works ;"  because  from  Him  also  is  the  origin  of  the 
works,  from  whom  the  co-operating  persons  [in  tbe  Deity]  have 
their  existence :  For  both  tiie  Son  is  born  of  Him,  and  the 
Holy  Spirit  principally  proceeds  from  Hira,  from  whom  the 
Son  is  born,  and  with  whom  the  same  Spirit  is  common  [illi] 
with  the  Son.  {Idem.,  torn.  10, /oZ.  11,  col.  1.) 

Indeed  God  the  Father  is  not  God  from  another  God ;  but 
God  the  Son  is  God  from  God  the  Father.   But  the  Sou  is  as 


A  LETTEE. 


467 


much  from  the  Father,  as  the  Father  is  from  no  one.  {Against 
Maxiininus^  lib.  3,  cap.  23,  col.  2.) 

HILARY. 

There  is  no  God  who  is  eternal  and  without  beginning,  and 
who  is  God  to  that  God  from  whom  are  all  things.  But  the 
Father  is  God  to  the  Son  ;  for  from  H  m  He  was  born  God. 
{Lib.  4,  fol.  60.) 

The  confession  of  the  true  faith  is,  God  is  so  born  of  God, 
as  light  is  from  light,  which,  without  detriment  to  itself,  offers 
its  own  nature  from  itself,,  that  it  may  bestow  that  which  it  has, 
and  that  it  may  have  what  it  bestows,  &c.  {Lib.  6,  fol  87.) 

It  is  apparent  from  these  passages,  according  to  the  senti- 
ments of  the  ancient  church,  that  the  Son,  even  as  he  is  God, 
is  from  the  Father,  because  he  has  received  his  Deity,  accord; 
ing  to  which  he  is  called  [Deiis]  "  God,"  by  being  born  of  the 
Father ;  though  the  name  of  God  does  not  indicate  this  mode 
of  being  or  existence.  From  these  quotations,  it  is  also  evi- 
dent that,  because  the  Father  is  [principium]  the  source  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  is  called  [princijpuin]  the  source 
of  the  whole  Deity ;  not  indeed  because  God  has  any  beginning 
or  source,  but  because  \illa'\  the  Deity  is  communicated  by 
the  Father  to  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  So  far,  therefore, 
is  this  from  being  a  correct  expression  :  ''The  Son  of  God  as 
he  is  God,  is  from  no  one  ;  and,  with  respect  to  his  essence, 
is  from  himself  or  from  no  one."  For  he  who  has  received 
his  essence  by  being  born  of  the  Father,  is  from  the  Father 
with  respect  to  his  essence. 

I  consider,  therefore,  that  those  who  desire  to  think  and  to 
speak  with  orthodox  antiquity,  ought  to  abstain  from  these 
methods  of  expression ;  because,  by  adopting  them,  they  seem 
to  become  the  patrons  of  the  opposing  heresies  of  the  Trlthe- 
ists,  and  the  Sabellians.  Peruse  the  preface  to  the  Dialogues 
of  Athanasius  On  the  Trinity.^  by  Theodore  Beza  ;  who 
excuses  Calvin  by  saying,  that  he  did  not  so  solicitously  ob- 
serve the  difference  between  the  two  phrases — "  He  is  the  Son 


JAMES  AEMINnJS. 


^erse^  through  himself,"  and  "  He  is  the  Son  a  se^  from  him- 
self." 

If  any  one  be  desirous  of  knowing  from  me  any  thing  fur- 
ther on  this  point,  I  will  not  refuse  to  hold  a  placid  conference 
with  him  either  in  writing  or  by  conversation.  I  now  proceed 
to  the  other  topics,  in  the  discussion  of  which  I  will  consult 
brevity. 

II.     THE  PKOVIDENCE  OF  GOD. 

My  sentiments  respecting  the  providence  of  God  are  these  : 
It  is  present  with,  and  presides  over,  all  things  ;  and  all  things, 
according  to  their  essences,  quantities,  qualities,  relations,  ac- 
tions, passions,  places,  times,  stations  and  habits,  are  subject 
to  its  governance,  conservation,  and  direction.  I  except 
neither  [singularid]  particular,  sublunary,  vile,  nor  contingent 
things,  not  even  the  free  wills  of  men  or  of  angels,  either  good 
or  evil :  And,  what  is  still  more,  I  do  not  take  away  from  the 
government  of  the  divine  providence  even  sins  themselves, 
whether  we  take  into  our  consideration  their  commencement, 
their  progress,  or  their  termination. 

1.  With  respect  to  the  beginning  of  sin,  I  attribute  the  fol- 
lowing acts  to  the  providence  of  God  : 

First.  Permission,  and  that  not  idle,  but  which  has  united 
in  it  four  positive  acts  :  (1.)  The  preservation  of  the  creature 
according  to  essence,  life  and  capability.  (2.)  Care  lest  a 
greater  or  an  equal  power  be  placed  in  opposition.  (3.)  The 
offering  of  an  object  against  which  sin  will  be  committed.  (4.) 
The  destined  concession  of  its  concjurrence,  which,  on  account 
of  the  dependence  of  a  second  on  the  first  cause,  is  a  necessary 
concurrence. 

Secondly.  The  administration  of  arguments  and  occasions, 
soliciting  to  the  perpetration  of  sin. 

Thirdly.  The  determination  of  place,  time,  manner,  and  of 
similar  circumstances. 

Fourthly.  The  immediate  concurrence  itself  of  God  with 
the  act  of  sin. 


A  LETTER. 


469 


2.  With  respect  to  tlie  progress  of  sin,  I  attribute  also  the 
following  four  acts  to  the  divine  government  : 

The  FIRST  is  the  direction  of  sin  that  is  already  begun,  to  a 
certain  object,  at  which  the  offending  creature  either  has  not 
aimed,  or  has  not  absolutely  aimed. 

The  SECOND  act  is  the  direction  of  sin  to  the  end  which  God 
himself  wills,  whether  the  creature  intend  or  do  not  intend 
that  end,  nay,  though  he  intend  another  and  quite  opposite 
end. 

The  THIRD  act  is  the  prescribing  and  determination  of  the 
time  during  which  he  wills  or  permits  sin  to  endure. 

The  FOURTH  act  is  the  defining  of  its  magnitude,  by  which 
[modus]  limits  are  placed  on  sin,  that  it  may  not  increase  and 
assume  greater  strength. 

The  whole  of  these  acts,  both  concerning  the  commence- 
ment and  the  progress  of  sin,  I  consider  distinctly  in  reference 
to  the  act  itself,  and  to  the  anomy  or  transgression  of  the 
law,  a  course  which,  according  to  my  judgment,  is  necessary 
and  useful. 

3.  Lastly,  with  respect  to  the  end  and  completion  of  sin, 
I  attribute  to  divine  providence  either  punishment  through  se- 
verity, or  remission  through  grace  ;  which  are  occupied  about 
sin,  in  reference  to  its  being  sin  and  to  its  being  a  transgres- 
sion of  the  law. 

Bat  I  most  solicitously  avoid  two  causes  of  offence — that 
God  be  not  proposed  as  the  author  of  sin,  and  that  its  liberty 
be  not  taken  away  from  the  human  will.  These  are  two  points 
which,  if  any  one  knows  how  to  avoid,  he  will  think  upon  no 
act  which  I  will  not  in  that  case  most  gladlj  allow  to  be  as- 
cribed to  the  providence  of  God,  provided  a  just  regard  be  had 
to  the  divine  pre-eminence. 

But  I  have  given  a  most  ample  explanation  of  these  my 
sentiments,  in  the  theses  which  were  twice  publicly  disputed 
on  the  same  subject  in  the  university.  On  this  account,  there- 
fore, I  declare  that  I  am  much  surprised,  and  not  without  good 
reason,  at  my  being  aspersed  w^th  this  calumnj^ — that  I  hold 
corrupt  opiiiions  resjpecting  the  providence  of  God.  If  it  be 
allowable  to  indulge  in  conjecture,  I  think  this  slander  had 


470 


JAMES  ABMIiaUS. 


its  origin  in  the  fact  of  mj  denying  that,  with  respect  to  the 
decree  of  God,  Adam  necessarily  sinned — an  assertion  which 
I  yet  constantly  deny,  and  think  it  one  that  ought  not  to  be 
tolerated,  unless  the  word  "necessarily"  be  received  in  the  ac- 
ceptation of  infallibly, ^'^  as  it  is  by  some  persons ;  though 
this  change  does  not  agree  with  the  etymology  of  the  two 
words ;  for,  necessity  is  an  affection  of  being,  but  ivfallililiiy 
is  an  affection  of  the  mind.  Yet  I  easily  endure  the  use  of 
the  first  of  these  words,  provided  those  two  inconveniences  to 
which  I  have  recently  alluded  be  faithfully  avoided. 

m.     DIVINE  PREDESTINATION. 

With  respect  to  the  article  of  predestination,  my  sentiments 
upon  it  are  the  following :  It  is  an  eternal  and  gracious  decree 
of  God  in  Christ,  by  which  he  determines  to  justify  and  adopt 
believers,  and  to  endow  them  with  life  eternal,  but  to  condemn 
Tinbelivers,  and  impenitent  persons ;  as  I  have  explained  in 
the  theses  on  the  same  subject,  which  were  publicly  disputed, 
and  in  which  no  one  found  any  thing  to  be  reprehended  as 
false  or  unsound.    Only  it  was  the  opinion  of  some  persons 
that  those  theses  did  not  contain  all  the  things  which  belong 
to  this  decree ;  nay,  that  the  predestination  about  which  there 
is  the  greatest  controversy  at  this  time,  is  not  the  subject  of 
investigation  in  those  theses.    This  indeed  I  confess  ;  for  I 
considered  it  the  best  course  to  discuss  that  decree  of  predesti- 
nation which  is  the  foundation  of  Christianity,  of  our  salvation, 
and  of  the  assurance  of  salvation,  and  upon  which  the  apos- 
tle treats  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  chapters  of  the  epistle  to 
the  Eomans,  and  in  the  first  chapter  of  that  to  the  Ephesians- 
But  such  a  decree  as  I  have  there  described  is  not  that  bj 
which  God  resolves  to  save  some  particular  persons,  and,  that 
he  may  do  this,  resolves  to  endow  them  with  faith,  but  to  con- 
demn others  and  not  to  endow  them  with  faith.    Yet  manj 
people  declare,  that  this  is  the  kind  of  predestination  on  which 
the  apostle  treats  in  the  passages  just  cited.   But  I  deny  what 
they  assert. 

I  grant  that  there  is  a  certain  eternal  decree  of  God,  accord- 


A  LETTER, 


471 


ing  to  which  he  administers  the  means  necessary  to  faith  and 
salvation,  and  this  he  does  in  such  a  manner  as  he  knows  to  be 
suited  to  righteousness,  that  is,  to  his  mercy  and  his  severity. 
But  about  this  decree,  I  think  nothing  more  is  necessary  to  be 
known,  than  that  faith  is  the  mere  gift  of  the  gracious  mercy 
of  God ;  and  that  unbelief  is  partly  to  be  attributed  to  the  fault 
and  wickedness  of  men,  and  partly  to  the  just  vengeance  of 
God,  which  deserts,  blinds  and  hardens  sinners. 

But  concerning  that  predestination  by  which  God  has  de- 
creed to  save  and  to  endow  with  faith  some  particular  persons, 
but  to  damn  others  and  not  endow  them  with  faith,  so  various 
are  the  sentiments  entertained  even  by  the  divines  of  our  pro- 
fession, that  this  very  diversity  of  opinion  easily  declares  the 
difficulty  with  which  it  is  possible  to  determine  any  thing  re- 
specting it.  For  while  some  of  them  propose,  as  the  object  of 
predestination  generally  considered,  that  is,  of  election  and 
reprobation^  man  as  a  sinner  and  fallen  in  Adam^  others  lay 
it  down,  man  considered  as  created  and  placed  "  in  puris 
naturalibusP  Some  of  them  consider  this  object  to  be,  man 
to  he  created^  or,  as  some  of  them  express  it,  man  as  solvable 
and  damnable^  as  capable  of  being  created  and  of  falling. 
Others  of  them  lay  down  the  object  of  election  and  reproba- 
tion, which  they  denominate  nonelection  and  peeterition, 
man  considered  in  common  and  absolutely  j  but  they  lay 
down  the  object  of  reprobation,  on  which  they  bestow  the  ap- 
pellation of  PEEDAMNATION  and  AFFIRMATIVE  REPROBATION,  man 

a  sinner  and  guilty  in  Adam,  Lastly,  some  of  them  suppose 
that  the  object  must  be  considered  entirely  in  common,  man 
as  yet  to  be  created^  as  created^  and  as  fallen. 

1  am  aware  that  when  this  diversity  of  opinion  is  offered  as 
an  objection,  it  is  usual  to  reply  that,  in  [summa']  the  sub- 
stance of  the  matter  there  is  complete  agreement,  although 
some  difference  exists  in  the  circumstances.  But  it  would  be 
in  my  power  to  prove,  that  the  preceding  opinions  differ  great- 
ly in  many  of  the  things  which  conduce  to  the  very  matter 
and  substance  of  this  kind  of  predestination  ;  but  that  of  con- 
sent or  agreement  there  is  nothing  except  in  the  minds  of  those 


472 


JAMES  AEMINITJS. 


who  hold  such  sentiments,  and  who  are  prepared  to  bear  with 
those  who  dissent  from  them  as  far  as  these  points  extend. 

Such  a  mode  of  consent  as  thig,  [of  which  they  are  them- 
selves the  patrons,]  is  of  the  highest  necessity  in  the  Christian 
church — as,  without  it,  peace  can  by  no  means  be  preserved. 
I  wish  that  I  also  was  able  to  experience  from  them  any  such 
benevolent  feelings  towards  me  and  my  sentiments.  In  that 
species  of  predestination  upon  which  I  have  treated,  I  define 
nothing  that  is  not  equally  approved  by  all.  On  this  point, 
alone,  I  differ — I  dare  not  with  a  safe  conscience  maintain  in 
the  affirmative  any  of  the  preceding  opinions.  I  am  also 
piepared  to  give  a  reason  for  this  conscientious  scruple  when 
it  shall  be  demanded  by  necessity,  and  can  be  done  in  a  suita- 
ble manner. 

IV.  .  GRACE  AND  FREE  WILL. 

Concerning  grace  and  free  will,  this  is  what  I  teach  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures  and  orthodox  consent :  Free  will  is  una- 
ble to  begin  or  to  perfect  any  true  and  spiritual  good,  without 
grace.  That  I  may  not  be  said,  like  Pelagius,  to  practice  de- 
lusion with  regard  to  the  word  "grace,"  I  mean  by  it  that 
which  is  the  grace  of  Christ  and  which  belongs  to  regenera- 
tion. I  affirm,  therefore,  that  this  grace  is  simply  and  abso- 
lutely necessary  for  the  illumination  of  the  mind,  the  due  or- 
dering of  the  affections,  and  the  inclination  of  the  will  to  that 
which  is  good.  It  is  this  grace  which  operates  on  the  mind, 
the  affections,  and  the  will  ;  which  infuses  good  thoughts  into 
the  mind,  inspires  good  desires  into  the  affections,  and  bends 
the  will  to  carry  into  execution  good  thoughts  and  good  de- 
sires. This  grace  Iprcevenit]  goes  before,  accompanies,  and 
follows ;  it  excites,  assists,  operates  that  we  will,  and  co-op- 
erates lest  we  will  in  vain.  It  averts  temptations,  assists  and 
grants  succor  in  the  midst  of  temptations,  sustains  man  against 
the  flesh,  the  world  and  Satan,  and  in  this  great  contest  grants 
to  man  the  enjoyment  of  the  victory.  It  raises  up  again  those 
who  are  conquered  and  have  fallen,  establishes  and  supplies 


A  LETTER. 


them  with  new  strength,  and  renders  thera  more  cautious. 
This  grace  commences  salvation,  promotes  it,  and  perfects  and 
consummates  it. 

I  confess  that  the  mind  of  [animalis]  a  natural  and  carnal 
man  is  obscure  and  dark,  that  his  affections  are  corrupt  and 
inordinate,  that  his  will  is  stubborn  and  disobedient,  and  that 
the  man  himself  is  dead  in  sins.  And  I  add  to  this — that 
teacher  obtains  my  highest  approbation  who  ascribes  as  much 
as  possible  to  divine  grace,  provided  he  so  pleads  the  cause  of 
grace,  as  not  to  inflict  an  injury  on  the  justice  of  God,  and  not 
to  take  away  the  f  ree  will  to  that  which  is  evil. 

I  do  not  perceive  what  can  be  further  required  from  me^ 
Let  it  only  be  pointed  out,  and  I  will  consent  to  give  it,  or  I 
will  shew  that  I  ought  not  to  give  such  an  assent.  Therefore, 
neither  do  I  perceive  with  what  justice  I  can  be  calumniated 
on  this  point,  since  I  have  explained  these  my  sentiments, 
with  sufiicient  plainness,  in  the  theses  on  free  will  which  were 
publicly  disputed  in  the  university. 

V.  JUSTIFICATION. 

The  last  article  is  on  justification,  about  which  these  are  my 
sentiments :  Faith,  and  faith  only,  (though  there  is  no  faith 
alone  without  works,)  is  imputed  for  righteousness.  By  thia 
alone  are  we  justified  before  God,  absolved  from  our  sins,  and 
are  accounted,  pronounced  and  declared  righteous  by  God, 
who  delivers  his  judgment  from  the  throne  of  grace. 

I  do  not  enter  into  the  question  of  the  active  and  the  pas- 
sive righteousness  of  Christ,  or  that  of  his  death  and  of  his  life. 
On  this  subject,  I  walk  at  liberty :  I  say  "  Christ  has  been  made 
of  God  to  me  righteousness" — "  he  has  been  made  sin  for  me, 
that  through  faith,  I  maybe  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him."" 

l^ov  yet  do  I  refuse  to  confer  with  my  brethren  on  this 
question,  provided  such  conference  be  conducted  v^ithout  bit- 
terness, and  without  an  opinion  of  necesssity,  [that  the  partial 
view  of  any  one  should  be  generally  received,]  from  which 
scarcely  any  other  result  can  ensue  than  the  existence  of  dis- 
traction, and  of  increased  effervescence  in  the  minds  of  men, 
31  Toii.  n. 


JAMES  ABMINnJS. 


especially  if  this  discussion  should  occur  between  those  who 
are  hot  controversialists,  and  too  vehement  in  their  zeal. 

Eut  some  persons  charge  me  with  this  as  a  crime — that  I 
say  the  act  itself  of  faith,  that  is,  believing  itself,  is  imputed 
for  righteousness,  and  that  in  a  proper  sense,  and  not  by  a 
metonymy.  I  acknowledge  this  charge,  as  I  have  the  apostle 
St.  Paul,  in  Romans  iv,  and  in  other  passages,  as  my  precur- 
sor in  the  use  of  this  phrase.  But  the  conclusion  which  they 
draw  from  this  affirmation,  namely,  "  that  Christ  and  his  right- 
eousness are  excluded  from  our  justification,  and  that  [earn] 
our  justification  is  thus  attributed  to  the  worthiness  of  our 
faith,"  I  by  no  means  concede  it  to  be  possible  for  them  to 
deduce  from  my  sentiments. 

For  the  word  "  to  impute^^''  signifies  that  faith  is  not  righte- 
ousness itself,  but  is  graciously  accounted  for  righteousness  ; 
by  which  circumstance  all  worthiness  is  taken  away  from  faith, 
•except  that  which  is  through  the  gracious  [dignatio]  conde- 
scending estimation  of  God.  But  this  gracious  condescension 
and  estimation  is  not  without  Christ,  but  in  reference  to  Christ, 
in  Christ,  and  on  account  of  Christ,  whom  God  hath  appoint- 
>ed  as  the  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood. 

I  affirm,  therefore,  that  faith  is  imputed  to  us  for  righteous- 
ness, on  account  of  Christ  and  his  righteousness.  In  this 
enunciation,  faith  is  the  object  of  imputation  ;  but  Christ  and 
his  obedience  are  the  impetratory  [procuring]  or  meritori- 
ous cause  of  justification.  Christ  and  his  obedience  are  the 
object  of  our  faith,  but  not  the  object  of  justification  or  divine 
imputation,  as  if  God  imputes  Christ  and  his  righteousness  to 
us  for  righteousness.  This  cannot  possibly  be,  since  the  obe- 
dience of  Christ  is  righteousness  itself,  taken  according  to  the 
most  severe  rigor  of  the  law.  But  I  do  not  deny  that  the  obe- 
dience of  Christ  is  imputed  to  us  ;  that  is,  that  it  is  accounted 
or  reckoned  for  us  and  for  our  benefit,  because  this  very  thing 
— that  God  reckons  the  righteousness  of  Christ  to  have  been 
performed  for  us  and  for  our  benefit — is  the  cause  why  God 
imputes  to  us  lor  righteousness  our  faith,  which  has  Christ  and 
his  righteousness  for  its  object  and  foundation,  and  why  he 
justifies  us  by  faith,  from  faith,  or  through  faith. 


A  LETTER. 


475 


If  any  one  will  point  out  an  error  in  this  my  opinion,  I  will 
gladly  own  it,  because  it  is  possible  for  me  to  err,  but  I  am 
not  willing  to  be  a  heretic. 

The  preceding,  then,  as  far  as  I  remember,  are  the  Articles 
which  your  excellency  mentioned  to  me,  with  my  explanations 
of  them  produced  from  sincerity  of  mind  ;  and  as  thus  sin- 
cere, I  wish  them  to  be  accounted  by  all  who  see  them.  This 
one  favor  I  wish  I  could  obtain  i'rom  my  brethren,  who  are  as- 
sociated with  me  in  the  Lord  by  the  profession  of  the  same 
religion,  that  they  would  at  least  believe  me  to  have  some  feel- 
ing of  conscience  towards  God.  And  this  favor  ought  to  be 
easily  granted  by  them,  through  the  charity  of  Christ,  if  they 
be  desirous  to  study  his  disposition  and  nature. 

Of  what  service  to  me  can  a  dissension  be  which  is  under- 
taken merely  through  a  reckless  humor  of  mind,  or  a  schism 
created  in  the  church  of  Christ,  of  which,  by  the  grace  of 
God  and  Christ,  I  profess  myself  to  be  a  member  ?  If  my 
brethren  suppose  that  I  am  incited  to  such  an  enterprise 
through  ambition  or  avarice,  I  sincerely  declare  in  the 
Lord,  that  they  know  me  not.  But  lean  confess  that  I  am  so 
free  from  the  latter  of  these  vices,  as  never  to  have  been 
tickled,  on  any  occasion,  with  even  the  most  enticing  of  its 
snares — though  it  might  be  in  my  power  to  excuse  or  palliate 
it  under  some  pretext  or  other.  With  regard  to  ambition,  I 
possess  it  not,  except  to  that  honorable  kind  which  impels  me 
to  this  service — to  inquire  with  all  earnestness  in  the  Ploly 
Scriptures  for  divine  truth,  and  mildly  and  without  contradic- 
tion to  declare  it  when  found,  without  prescribing  it  to  any 
one,  or  laboring  to  extort  consent,  much  less  through  a  de- 
sire to  "  have  dominion  over  the  faith  of  others,"  but  rather 
for  the  purpose  of  my  winning  some  souls  for  Christ,  that  I 
may  be  a  sweet  savor  to  him,  and  may  obtain  [prohum  no- 
men]  an  approved  reputation  in  the  church  of  the  saints. 
This  good  name  I  hope  I  shall  obtain  by  the  grace  of  Christ, 
after  a  long  period  of  patient  endurance  ;  though  I  be  now 
a  reproach  to  my  brethren,  and  "  made  as  the  filth  of  the 
world  and  the  offscouring  of  all  things"  to  those  who  with  me 

-.0  ''■ 


476  JAMES  ARMmiTJS. 

woi-ship  and  invoke  one  God  the  Father,  and  one  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  in  one  spirit  and  with  the  same  faith,  and  who  have 
the  same  hope  with  me  of  obtaining  the  heavenly  inheritance 
through  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

I  hope  the  Lord  will  grant  unto  me,  that  they  and  I  may 
meekly  meet  together  in  his  great  name,  and  institute  a 
Christian  conference  about  those  things  which  appertain  to 
religion.  O  may  the  light  of  that  sacred  and  happy  day 
speedily  shine  upon  me.  In  that  assembly,  I  engage,  through 
the  grace  of  God,  to  manifest  such  moderation  of  mind,  and 
such  love  for  tnith  and  peace,  as  ought  deservedly  to  be  re- 
quired and  expected  from  a  servant  of  Christ  Jesus. 

In  the  mean  time  [till  this  assembly  can  be  convened],  let 
my  brethren  themselves  remain  quiescent  and  suffer  me  to 
be  quiet,  that  I  may  be  at  peace,  and  neither  annoy  them, 
nor  create  any  uneasiness.  If  they  entertain  other  thoughts 
concerning  me,  let  them  institute  an  [ecclesiastical]  action 
against  me ;  I  will  not  shun  or  evade  the  authority  of  a  com- 
petent judge,  neither  will  I  forfeit  my  recognizances  by  failing 
to  appear. 

If  it  be  supposed  that  the  minds  of  those  who  hear  me  are 
preoccupied  in  my  favor,  at  a  distance,  by  some  politic  subtil- 
ity  which  I  display,  and  that  the  matter  is  so  managed  through 
cunning,  as  makes  my  brethren  neither  to  consider  it  advisa- 
ble to  arraign  me  before  the  judges,  nor  to  account  it  suffi- 
ciently safe  to  'commit  to  my  care  the  youthful  students  ;  and 
therefore,  that  the  black  stain  which  I  have  deserved  ought  to 
be  affixed  to  my  reputation,  that  my  pupils  and  hearers  may 
be  frightened  away ;  therefore,  lest  the  result  of  this  should 
be  that  the  deferring  of  such  a  conference  be  productive  of 
certain  danger,  behold  I  now  offer  myself,  that  I  may,  in 
company  with  them,  address,  solicit,  and  entreat  those  high 
personages  who  are  invested  with  the  power  of  issuing  a  sum- 
mons for  a  convention  of  this  kind,  or  of  granting  it,  not  to 
suffer  us  any  longer  to  continue  in  this  anguish  and  disqui- 
etude of  mind,  but  either  themselves  to  apply  a  speedy  rem- 
edy, or  allow  it  to  be  applied  by  others,  but  still  by  their 
order  and  under  their  direction. 


A  LETTER. 


I  will  not  refuse  to  place  myself  before  any  assembly 
whatsoever,  whether  it  be  composed  of  all  the  ministers  in 
our  United  J^etherlands,  or  of  some  to  be  convoked  from 
each  of  the  seven  provinces,  or  even  of  all  the  ministers  of 
Holland  and  West  Friesland,  to  which  province  our  univer- 
sity at  Leyden  belongs,  or  of  some  ministers  to  be  selected 
out  of  these,  provided  the  whole  affair  be  transacted  under 
the  cognizance  of  our  lawful  magistrates.  'Nor  do  I  avoid 
or  dread  the  presence  of  learned  men,  who  may  be  invited 
from  other  countries,  provided  they  be  present  at  the  con- 
ference on  equitable  conditions,  and  subject  to  the  same  laws 
as  those  under  which  I  must  be  placed. 

To  express  the  whole  matter  at  once — ^let  a  convention  be 
summoned,  consisting  of  many  members  or  of  few,  provided 
some  bright  hope  of  success  be  aflPorded  [to  them],  a  hope,  I 
repeat  it,  which  I  shall  be  able,  by  sound  arguments,  to  prove 
destitute  of  good  foundation.  Behold  me,  this  day,  nay, 
this  very  hour,  prepared  and  ready  to  enter  into  it.  For  I 
am  weary  of  being  daily  aspersed  with  the  filthy  scum  of 
fresh  calumnies,  and  grieved  at  being  burdened  with  the  ne- 
cessity of  clearing  myself  from^  them.  In  this  part  of  my 
conduct,  I  am  assuredly  dissimilar  from  heretics,  who  have 
either  avoided  ecclesiastical  assemblies,  or  have  managed  mat- 
ters so  as  to  be  able  to  confide  in  the  number  of  their  retain- 
ers, and  to  expect  a  certain  victory. 

But  I  have  finished.  For  I  have  occupied  your  attention, 
most  honorable  sir,  a  sufficient  length  of  time ;  and  I  have 
made  a  serious  encroachment  on  those  valuable  moments 
which  you  would  have  devoted  to  matters  of  greater  impor- 
tance. Your  excellency  will  have  the  condescension  to  for- 
give the  liberty  which  I  have  taken  to  address  this  letter  to 
you,  as  it  has  been  extorted  from  me  by  a  degree  of  necessity 
— and  not  to  disdain  to  afford  me  your  patronage  and  pro- 
tection, just  so  far  as  divine  truth  and  the  peace  and  concord 
of  the  Christian  church  will  allow  you  to  vouchsafe. 

I  pray  and  beseech  Almighty  God  long  to  preserve  your 
excellency  in  safety,  to  endue  you  yet  more  with  the  spirit  of 
wisdom  and  prudence,  by  which  you  may  be  enabled  to  dis- 


478 


JAMES  ABMINIUS. 


charge  the  duties  of  the  embassy  which  has  been  imposed 
upon  you,  and  thus  meet  the  wishes  of  the  most  illustrious 
prince,  the  Elector  Palatine.  And,  after  you  have  happily 
discharged  those  duties,  may  he  benignantly  and  graciously 
grant  to  you  a  prosperous  return  to  your  own  country  and 
kindred. 

Thus  prays  your  excellency's  most  devoted  servant, 
JAMES  ARMimUS, 

Professor  of  Theology  in  the  ) 
University  of  Leyden.  j 

Leyden,  April  5,  1608. 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES 

TO  BE  ■ 

DILIGENTLY  EXAMINED  AND  WEIGHED. 


BSOAUSB  SOME  CONTROVERSY  HAS  A2ISEJT  CONCERNING  THEM  AMONG  EVEN  THOSE  WHO 
PROFESS  THE  BEFORMKB  RELIGION. 


These  articles  are  partly  either  denied  or  affirmed  in  a  decisive  manner,  and' 
partly  either  denied  or  affirmed  in  a  doubting  manner,  each  of  which  methods  i* 
signified  by  certain  indicative  signs  tohich  are  added  to  the  different  articles. 

I.     ON"  THE  SCRIPTCTRE  AND  HUMAN  TRADITIONS. 

1.  Thk  rule  of  theological  verity  is  not  two-fold,  (jn^primari/ 
and  the  other  seoondary  ;  but  it  is  one  and  simple,  the  Sacred 
Scriptures. 

2.  The  S3ripture3  are  the  rule  of  all  divine  verity,  from 
themselves,  in  themselves,  and  through  themselves ;  and  it  is 
a  rash  assertion,  "  that  they  are  indeed  the  rule,  but  only  when, 
understood  according  to  the  meaning  of  the  confession  of  the 
Dutch  churches,  or  when  explained  by  the  interpretation  of 
the  Heidelberg  Catechism." 

3.  No  writing  composed  by  men — by  one  man,  by  few  men, 
or  by  many — (^with  the  exception  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,)  i& 
either  auro-s^jg'ov  "creditable  of  itself,"  or  afio's^i^ov^  "of  itself 
deserving  of  implicit  credence,"  and,  therefore,  is  not  exempted 
from  an  examination  to  be  instituted  by  means  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. 

4.  It  is  a  thoughtless  assertion,  "  that  the  Confession  and 
Catechism  are  called  in  question,  when  they  are  subjected  to- 


480 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


examination  for  they  lia,ve  never  been  placed  beyond  the 
hazard  of  being  called  in  doubt,  nor  can  they  be  so  placed. 

5.  It  is  tyrannical  and  popish  to  bind  the  consciences  of  men 
by  human  writings,  and  to  hinder  them  from  being  submitted 
to  a  legitimate  examination,  under  what  pretext  soever  such 
tyrannical  conduct  is  adopted. 

II.     ON"  GOD  COXSIDERED  ACCORDING  TO  HIS  NATURE. 

1.  God  is  good  by  a  natural  and  internal  necessity,  not 
freely  ;  which  last  word  is  stupidly  explainel  by  the  terms 
\_vlcoacte^^    unconstrainedly"  and    not  slavishly." 

2.  G^d  foreknows  future  things  through  the  infinity  of  his 
iSSsence,  and  through  the  pre-eminent  perfection  of  his  under- 
standing and  prescience,  not  as  he  willed  or  decreed  that  they 
should  necessarily  be  done,  though  he  would  not  foreknow 
them  except  as  they  were  fnture,  and  they  would  not  be  future 
cinless  God  had  decreed  either  to  perform  or  to  permit 
them . 

3.  God  loves  righteousness  and  his  creatures,  yet  he  loves 
-righteousness  still  more  than  the  creatures,  from  which,  two 
consequences  follow  : 

4.  The  FIR3T,  that  God  does  not  hate  his  creature,  except  on 
account  of  sin. 

5.  The  second,  that  God  absolutely  loves  no  creature  to  life 
•eternal,  except  when  considered  as  righteous,  either  by  legal 
i)r  evano^elical  ris'liteousness. 

6.  The  will  of  God  is  both  correctly  and  usefully  distinguished 
into  that  which  is  antecedent^  and  that  which  is  eo/ise^usnt. 

Y.  The  distinction  of  the  will  of  God  into  that  which  is 
secret  or  of  his  good  pleasure,  and  that  which  is  revealed  or 
signified^  cannot  bear  a  rigid  examination. 

8.  Punitive  justice  and  mercy  neither  are,  nor  can  they  be 
the  inly  moving"  or  final  causes  of  the  first  decree,  or  of  its 

first  operation. 

9.  God  is  blessed  in  himself  and  in  the  knowledge  of  his 
own  perfection.  He  is,  therefore,  in  want  of  nothing,  neither 
does  he  require  the  demonstration  of  any  of  his  properties  by 


CERTAIN  AETICLES. 


481 


external  operations  :  Yet  if  he  do  this,  it  is  evident  that  he 
does  it  of  his  pure  and  free  will ;  although  in  this  declaration 
[of  any  of  his  properties]  a  certain  order  must  be  observed 
according  to  the  various  egresses  or  "  goings  forth"  of  his 
goodness,  and  according  to  the  prescript  of  his  wisdom  and 
justice. 

III.     ON  GOD,  CONSIDERED  ACCORDING  TO  THE  RELATION 
BETWEEN  THE  PERSONS  IN  THE  TRINITY. 

1.  The  Son  of  God  is  not  called  by  the  ancient  fathers  "  God 
from  himself^''  and  this  is  a  dangerous  expression.  For, 
AuTo^sog-,  [as  thus  interpreted,  God  from  himself^  properly 
signifies  that  the  Son  has  not  the  divine  essence  from  another* 
Bat  it  is  by  a  catachresis,  or  improperly,  that  the  essence  which 
the  Son  has  is  not  from  another ;  because  the  relation  of  the 
subject  is  thus  changed :  for  "  the  Son,"  and  "  the  divine 
essence,"  differ  in  relation. 

2.  The  divine  essence  is  communicated  to  the  Son  by  the 
Father,  and  this  properly  and  truly.  Wherefore  it  is  unskill- 
fuUy  asserted  "  that  the  divine  essence  is  indeed  ^ro^^rZ?/  said 
to  be  common  to  the  Son  and  to  the  Father,  but  is  imjproperly 
said  to  be  communicated  :"  For  it  is  not  common  to  both  ex- 
cept in  reference  to  its  being  communicated. 

3.  The  Son  of  God  is  correctly  called  Auro^soj,  very  God,'' 
as  this  word  is  received  for  that  which  is  God  himself,  truly 
God.  But  he  is  erroneously  designated  by  that  epithet,  so  far 
as  it  signifies  that  he  has  an  essence  not  communicated  by  the 
Father,  yet  has  one  in  common  with  the  Father. 

4.  "  The  Son  of  God,  in  regard  to  his  essence,  is  from  him- 
self," is  an  ambiguous  expression,  and,  on  that  account, 
dangerous.  Neither  is  the  ambiguity  removed  by  saying — 
"  Tiie  Son,  with  respect  to  his  absolute  essence,  or  to  his  essence 
absolutely  considered,  is  from  himself."  Besides,  these  modes 
of  speaking  are  not  only  novel,  but  are  also  mere  prattle. 

5.  The  divine  persons  are  not  Tpo-zj^oj  u-srap^sw^j  or  modes  of 
being  or  of  existing,  or  modes  of  the  divine  essence  ;  for  they 
are  things  with  the  mode  of  being  or  existing. 


4:82 


JAMES  AKMINIUS. 


6.  The  divine  persons  are  distinguished  bja  real  distinction, 
not  by  the  degree  ani  mode  of  the  thing. 

T.  A  person  is  an  individual  subsistence  itself,  not  a  charac- 
teristic property,  nor  is  it  an  individual  principle  ;  though  it 
be  not  an  individual,  nor  a  person  without  a  characteristic 
property  or  without  an  individual  principle. 

8.  Queries. — Is  it  not  useful  that  the  Trinity  be  considered, 
both  as  it  exists  in  nature  itself,  according  to  the  coessential 
relation  of  the  divine  persons,  and  as  it  has  been  manifested  in 
the  economy  of  salvation,  to  be  accomplished  by  God  the  Fa- 
ther, in  Christ,  through  the  Holy  Spirit  ?  And  does  not  the 
former  of  these  considerations  appertain  to  religion  universally, 
and  to  that  which  was  prescribed  to  Ada-n,  according  to  the 
law  ?  But  the  latter  consideration  properly  belongs  to  the 
gospdl  of  Jes'js  Christ,  yet  not  excluding  that  which  I  have 
mentioned  as  belonging  to  all  religion  universally,  and  there- 
fore to  that  which  is  Christian. 

IV.    ON  THE  DECEEE  OF  GOD. 

1.  The  decrees  of  Gt  d  are  the  \_ad  extra]  extrinsic  acts  of 
God,  though  they  are  internal,  and,  therefore,  made  by  the 
free  will  of  God,  without  any  absolute  necessity.  Yet  one  de- 
cree seems  to  require  the  supposition  of  another,  on  account 
of  a  certain  [condecentiam]  fitness  of  equity ;  as  the  decree 
concerning  the  creation  of  a  rational  creature,  and  the  decree 
concerning  the  salvation  or  damnation  [of  that  creature]  on. 
the  condition  of  obedience  or  disobedience.  The  act  of  the 
creature  also,  when  considered  by  God  from  eternity,  may 
sometimes  be  the  occasion,  and  sometinaes  the  outwardly  mov- 
ing cause  of  making  some  decree  ;  and  this  may  be  so  far,  that 
without  such  act  [of  the  creature]  the  decree  neither  would 
nor  could  be  made. 

2.  Query. — Can  the  act  of  the  creature  impose  a  necessity 
on  God  of  making  some  decree,  and  indeed  [talis]  a  decree  of 
a  particular  kind  and  no  other — and  this  not  only  according 
to  some  act  to  be  performed  respecting  the  creature  and  his 
act,  but  also  according  to  a  certain  mode  by  which  that  act 
must  be  accomplished  ? 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


483 


3.  One  and  the  same  in  number  is  the  volition  by  which 
God  decrees  something  and  determines  to  do  or  to  permit  it, 
and  by  which  he  does  or  permits  the  very  thing  which  he 
decreed. 

4  About  an  object  which  is  one  and  the  same,  and  uni- 
formly considered,  there  cannot  be  two  decrees  of  God,  or  two 
volitions,  either  in  reality,  or  according  to  any  [speciem']  sem- 
blance of  a  contrary  volition — as  to  will  to  save  man  under 
conditions,  and  yet  to  will  precisely  and  absolutely  to  con- 
demn him. 

5.  A  decree  of  itself  imposes  no  necessity  on  any  thing  or 
event.  But  if  any  necessity  exists  through  the  decree  of  God, 
it  exists  through  the  intervention  of  the  divine  power,  and  in- 
deed when  he  judges  it  proper  to  employ  his  irresistible  pow- 
er to  effect  what  be  has  decreed. 

6.  Therefore,  it  is  not  correctly  said  "The  will  of  God  is 
the  necessity  of  things." 

7.  'Nor  is  this  a  just  expression  :  "All  things  happen  ne- 
cessarily with  respect  to  the  divine  decree." 

8.  As  many  distinct  decrees  are  conceived  by  us,  and  must 
necessarily  be  conceived ;  as  there  are  objects  about  which  God 
is  occupied  in  decreeing,  or  as  there  are  axioms  by  which  those 
decrees  are  enunciated. 

9.  Though  all  the  decrees  of  God  have  been  made  from  eter- 
nity, yet  a  certain  order  of  priority  and  posteriority  must  be 
laid  down,  according  to  their  nature,  and  the  mutual  relation 
between  them. 

V.     CSr  PREDESTINATION  TO  SALVATION,  AND  ON  DAMNATION 
CONSIDERED  IN  THE  HIGHEST  DEGREE. 

1.  The  first  in  order  of  the  divine  decrees  is  not  that  of  pre- 
destination, by  which  God  foreordained  to  supernatural  ends, 
and  by  which  he  resolved  to  save  and  to  condemn,  to  declare 
his  mercy  and  his  punitive  justice,  and  to  illustrate  the  glory 
of  his  saving  grace,  and  of  his  wisdom  and  power  which  cor- 
respond with  that  most  free  grace. 


48i 


JAMES  AKMTNIUS. 


2.  The  object  of  predestination  to  supernatural  ends,  to  sal- 
vation and  death,  to  the  demonstration  of  the  mercy  and  puni- 
tive justice,  or  of  the  saving  grace,  the  wisdom,  and  the  most 
free  power  of  God,  is  not  rational  creatures  indefinitely  fore- 
known, and  capable  of  salvation,  of  damnation,  of  creation,  of 
falling,  and  of  reparation  or  of  being  recovered. 

3.  Xor  is  the  subject  some  particular  creatures  from  among 
those  who  are  considered  in  this  manner. 

4.  The  difference  between  the  vessels  to  honor  and  those 
to  dishonor,  that  is,  of  mercy  and  wrath,  does  not  appertain 
to  the  adorning  or  perfection  of  the  universe  or  of  the  house 
of  God. 

5.  The  entrance  of  sin  into  the  world  does  not  appertain  to 
the  beauty  of  the  universe. 

6.  Creation  in  the  upright  state  of  original  righteousness  is 
not  a  means  for  executing  the  decree  of  predestination,  or  of 
election,  or  of  reprobation. 

7.  It  is  horrid  to  affirm,  that  "  the  way  of  reprobation  is  cre- 
ation in  the  upright  state  of  original  righteousness  (Goma- 
rus,  in  his  Theses  on  Predestination ;)  and  in  this  very  asser- 
tion are  propounded  two  contrary  volitions  of  God  concerning 
one  and  the  same  thing. 

8.  It  is  a  horrible  affirmation,  that  "God  has  predesti- 
nated whatsoever  men  he  pleased  not  only  to  damnation, 
but  likewise  to  the  causes  of  damnation."  (Beza^  vol.  1, 
foL  417.) 

9.  It  is  a  horrible  affirmation,  that  "  men  are  predestinated 
to  eternal  death  by  the  naked  will  or  choice  of  God,  without 
any  demerit  \_proj)riuni]  on  their  part."  {Oalvin,  Inst.  I.  1, 
c.  2,  3.) 

10.  This,  also,  is  a  horrible  affirmation :  "  Some  among 
men  have  been  created  unto  life  eternal,  and  others  unto  death 
eternal." 

11.  It  is  not  a  felicitous  expression,  that  "  preparation  unto 
destruction  is  not  to  be  referred  to  any  other  thing,  than  to  the 
secret  counsel  of  God." 

12.  Permission  for  the  fall  [of  Adam]  into  sin,  h  not  the 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


485 


means  of  executing  the  decree  of  predestination,  or  of  elec- 
tion, or  of  reprobation. 

13.  It  is  an  absurd  assertion,  that  "the  demerits  of  the  rep- 
robate are  the  subordinate  means  of  bringing  them  onwai'd  to 
destined  destruction." 

14.  It  is  a  false  assertion,  that  "the  efficient  and  sufficient 
cause  and  matter  of  predestination  are  thus  found  in  those  who 
are  reprobated." 

15.  The  elect  are  not  called  "vessels  of  mercy"  in  the  rela- 
tion of  means  to  the  end,  but  because  mercy  is  the  inly  mov- 
ing cause,  by  which  is  made  the  decree  itself  of  predestination 
to  salvation. 

16.  No  small  injury  is  inflicted  on  Christ  as  mediator, 
when  he  is  called  "the  subordinate  cause  of  destined  sal- 
vation." 

IT.  The  predestination  of  angels  and  of  men  differ  so 
much  from  each  other,  that  no  property  of  God  can  be  pre- 
fixed to  both  of  them  unless  it  be  received  in  an  ambiguous 
acceptation. 

VI.     ON  THE  CKEATION,  AND  CHIEFLY  THAT  OF  MAN. 

1.  The  creation  of  things  out  of  nothing  is  the  very  first  of 
all  the  external  acts  of  God  ;  nor  is  it  possible  for  any  act  to  be 
prior  to  this,  or  conceived  to  be  prior  to  it ;  and  the  decree 
concerning  creation  is  the  first  of  all  the  decrees  of  God ;  be- 
cause the  properties  according  to  which  he  performs  and  op- 
erates all  things,  are,  in  the  first  [momento]  impulse  of  his 
nature,  and  in  his  first  egress,  occupied  about  nihility  or 
nothing,  when  those  properties  are  borne,  ad  extra^  "  outr 
wards." 

2.  God  has  formed  two  creatures  rational  and  capable  of 
things  divine ;  one  of  them  is  purely  spiritual  and  invisible, 
and  [that  is  the  class  of]  angels  ;  but  the  other  is  partly  cor- 
poreal and  partly  spiritual,  visible  and  invisible,  and  [that  is 
the  class  of]  men;  and  the  perfection  of  this  universe  seems 


486 


JAMES  AEMINITJS. 


to  have  required  [id]  the  formation  of  these  two  [classes  of] 
creatures. 

3.  Query.— Did  it  not  become  the  manifold  wisdom  of 
God,  and  was  it  not  suitable  to  the  difference  by  which  these 
two  rational  creatures  were  distinguished  at  the  very  creation, 
that,  in  the  mode  and  [ratio7ie]  circumstances  of  imparting 
eternal  life  to  angels  and  to  men,  he  might  act  in  a  different 
manner  with  the  former  from  that  which  he  adopts  towards 
the  latter  ?    It  appears  that  he  might  do  so. 

4.  But  two  general  methods  may  be  mentally  conceived  by 
us,  ONE  of  which  is  through  the  strict  observance  of  the  law 
laid  down,  without  hope  of  pardon  if  any  transgression  were 
committed  ;  but  the  other  is  through  the  remission  of  sins, 
though  a  law  agreeable  to  their  nature  was  likewise  to  be  pre- 
scribed by  a  peremptory  decree  to  men,  with  whom  it  was  not 
the  will  of  God  to  treat  in  a  strict  manner  and  according  to 
the  utmost  rigor  ;  and  obedience  was  to  be  required  from  them 
without  a  promise  or  pardon. 

5.  The  image  and  likeness  of  God,  after  which  man  was 
created,  belongs  partly  to  the  very  nature  of  man,  so  that, 
without  it,  man  cannot  be  man  ;  but  it  partly  consists  in  those 
things  which  concern  supernatural,  heavenly  and  spiritual 
things."  The  former  class  comprises  the  understanding,  the 
affections,  and  the  will,  which  is  free  ;  but  the  latter,  the 
knowledge  of  God  and  of  things  divine,  righteousness,  true 
holiness,  &c. 

6.  With  respect  to  essence  and  adequate  objects,  the  faith 
by  which  Adam  believed  in  God  is  not  the  same  as  that  by 
which  he  believed  in  God  after  the  promise  made  concerning 
the  Blessed  Seed,  and  not  the  same  as  that  by  which  we  be- 
lieve the  gospel  of  Christ. 

7.  Without  [IcBsionem]  doing  any  wrong  to  God,  to  Adam, 
and  to  the  truth  itself,  it  may  be  said,  that  in  his  primeval 
state  Adam  neither  received  or  possessed  a  proximate  [poten- 

capability  of  understandiDg,  believing,  or  performing 
any  thing  whatsoever  which  could  be  necessary  to  be  under- 
stood, believed,  or  performed  by  him,  in  any  state  whatsoever 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


4S7 


at  which  it  was  possible  for  him  to  arrive,  either  hy  his  own 
[factol  endeavors  or  by  the  gift  of  God,  though  he  must  have 
had  a  remote  capability,  otherwise  something  essential  would 
still  have  been  to  be  created  within  man  himself. 

8.  The  liberty  of  the  will  consists  in  this — when  all  the  re- 
quisites for  willing  or  not  willing  are  laid  down,  man  is  still 
indifferent  to  will  or  not  to  will,  to  will  this  rather  than  that. 
This  indifference  is  removed  by  the  previous  determina- 
tion, by  which  the  will  is  circumscribed  and  absolutely 
determined  to  the  one  part  or  to  the  other  of  the  contra- 
diction or  contrariety ;  and  this  predetermination,  therefore, 
does  not  consist  with  the  liberty  of  the  will,  which  requires 
not  only  free  capability,  but  also  free  use  in  the  very  exercise  of  it. 

9.  Internal  necessity  is  as  repugnant  to  lib.erty  as  external 
necessity  is ;  nay,  external  necessity  does  not  necessitate  to 
act  except  by  the  intervention  of  that  which  is  internal. 

10.  Adam  either  possessed,  or  had  ready  and  prepared 
for  him,  sufficient  grace,  whether  it  were  habitual  or  assist- 
ing, to  obey  the  command  imposed  on  him,  both  that  com- 
mand which  was  symbolical  and  ceremonial,  and  that  which 
was  moral. 

VII.     ON  THE  DOMINION  OF  GOD  OVER  THE  CREATUEES, 
AND  CHIEFLY  OVER  MAN. 

1.  The  dominion  of  God  over  the  creatures  rests  on  the 
communication  of  the  good  which  he  has  bestowed  on  them  : 
And  since  this  good  is  not  infinite,  neither  is  the  dominion 
itself  infinite.  But  that  dominion  is  infinite  accordino;  to 
which  it  may  be  lawful  and  proper  for  God  to  issue  his 
commands  to  the  creature,  to  impose  on  him  all  his  works,  to 
nse  him  in  all  those  things  which  his  omnipotence  might  be 
able  to  command  and  to  impose  upon  him,  and  to  engage  his 
services  or  attention. 

2.  Therefore  the  dominion  of  God  does  not  extend  itself  so 
far  as  to  be  able  to  inflict  eternal  death  on  a  rational  crea- 
ture, or  to  destine  him  to  death  eternal,  without  the  demerits 
of  the  creature  himself. 


488 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


3.  It  is,  therefore,  falsely  asserted,  that  "  though  God  des- 
tined and  created  for  destruction  an}^  creatures  (indefinitely 
considered)  without  any  consideration  of  sin  as  the  meritori- 
ous cause,  yet  he  cannot  be  accused  of  injustice,  because  he 
possesses  an  absolute  right  of  dominion  over  them."  ( Gomar's 
Theses  on  Predestination.) 

4.  Another  false  assertion  is  this  :  "  By  the  light  of  glory 
we  shall  understand  by  what  right  God  can  condemn  [im- 
meritutn]  an  innocent  person,  or  one  who  has  not  merited 
damnation,  as  by  the  light  of  grace  we  now  understand  by 
what  right  God  saves  \_imme7''itos]  unworthy  and  sinful  men ; 
yet  this  right  we  do  not  comprehend  by  the  light  of  nature." 
{Luther  On  the  Servitude  of  the  Will) 

5.  But  still  more  false  is  the  following  assertion  :  "  Man  is 
bound  to  acquiesce  in  this  will  of  God,  nay,  to  give  thanks  to 
God,  that  he  has  made  him  an  instrument  of  the  divine  glory, 
to  be  displayed  through  wrath  and  power  in  his  eternal  de- 
struction." 

6.  God  can  make  of  his  own  whatsoever  he  wills.  But 
he  does  not  will,  neither  can  he  will,  to  make  of  that  which 
is  his  own  whatever  it  is  possible  for  him  to  make  accord- 
ing to  his  infinite  and  absolute  power. 

VIII.     ON  THE  PROVIDENCE  OF  GOD. 

1.  The  providence  of  God  is  subordinate  to  creation ;  and 
it  is,  therefore,  necessary  that  it  should  not  impinge  against 
creation,  which  it  would  do,  were  it  to  inhibit  or  hinder  the 
use  of  free  will  in  man,  or  should  deny  to  man  its  necessary 
concurrence,  or  should  direct  man  to  another  end,  or  to  de- 
struction, than  to  that  which  is  agreeable  to  the  condition  and 
state  in  which  he  was  created  ;  that  is,  if  the  providence  of 
God  should  so  rule  and  govern  man  that  he  should  necessarily 
become  \vitiosus'\  corrupt,  in  order  that  God  might  manifest 
his  own  glory,  both  of  justice  and  mercy,  through  the  sin  of 
man,  according  to  his  eternal  counsel. 

2.  It  appertains  to  the  providence  of  God  to  act  and  permit ; 
which  two  things  are  confounded  when  permission  is  changed 


CEERTAIN  AETIOLES. 


489 


into  action  under  this  pretext — that  it  cannot  be  idle  or  un- 
employed. 

3.  Divine  providence  does  not  determine  a  free  will  to  one 
part  of  a  contradiction  or  contrariety,  that  is,  by  a  determina- 
tion preceding  the  actual  volition  itself ;  [alioquin]  under  other 
circumstances  the  concurrence  of  the  very  volition  v^ith  the 
will  is  the  concomitant  cause,  and  thus  determines  the  will  with 
the  volition  itself,  by  an  act  which  is  not  previous  but  simulta- 
neous, as  the  schoolmen  express  themselves. 

4.  The  permission  of  God  by  which  he  permits  any  one  to 
fall  into  sin  is  not  correctly  defined  as  "  the  subtraction  or  with- 
drawing of  divine  grace,  by  which,  while  God  executes  the 
decrees  of  his  will  through  his  rational  creatures,  he  either 
does  not  unfold  to  the*  creature  his  own  will  by  which  he  wills 
that  wicked  work  to  be  done,  or  he  does  not  bend  the  will  of 
the  man  to  obey  the  divine  will  in  that  action."  ( Ursinus  On 
Providence^  torn.  1,  fol.  178.) 

IX.     ON  PREDESTINATION,  CONSIDERED  IN  THE  PRIMEVAL 
STATE  OF  MAN. 

1.  It  is  not  a  true  assertion,  that  "  out  of  men  considered 
in  puris  naturalihusy  (either  without  supernatural  things  or 
with  them,)  God  has  determined,  by  the  decree  of  election,  to 
elevate  to  supernatural  felicity  some  particular  men,  but  to 
leave  others  in  nature." 

2.  And  it  is  rashly  asserted  that  "  it  belongs  to  \ration€m'\ 
the  relation  or  analogy  of  the  universe,  that  some  men  be 
placed  on  the  right  and  others  on  the  left,  even  as  the  method 
of  the  master  Builder  requires,  that  some  stones  be  placed  on 
the  left  side,  and  others  on  the  right,  of  a  house  which  is  to  be 
built." 

3.  The  permission  by  which  God  permits  that  some  men 
wander  from  and  miss  the  supernatural  end,  is  unwisely  made 
subordinate  to  this  predestination  ;  for  it  appertains  to  provi- 
dence to  lead  and  conduct  a  rational  creature  to  supernatural 
felicity  in  a  manner  which  is  agreeable  to  the  nature  of  that 
creature. 

32  TOL  n. 


490 


JAMES  AKMimUS. 


4.  The  permission,  also,  by  which  God  permitted  our  firit 
parents  to  fall  into  sin,  is  rashly  said  to  be  subordinate  to  this 
predestination. 

X.     ON  THE  CAUSE  OF  SIN  UNIVERSALLY. 

1.  Though  sin  can  be  committed  by  none  except  by  a  ra- 
tional creature,  and,  therefore,  ceases  to  be  sin  by  this  very 
circumstance  if  the  cause  of  it  be  ascribed  to  God ;  yet  it 
seems  possible,  by  four  arguments,  to  fasten  this  charge  on  our 
divines.  "  It  follows  from  their  doctrine  that  God  is  the  au- 
thor of  sinJ^ 

2.  First  Reason. — ^Because  they  teach  that,  "  without  fore- 
sight of  sin,  God  absolutely  determined  to  declare  his  own 
glory  through  punitive  justice  and  mercy,  in  the  salvation  of 
some  men  and  in  the  damnation  of  others."  Or,  as  others  of 
them  assert,  "  God  resolved  to  illustrate  his  own  glory  by  the 
demonstration  of  saving  grace,  wisdom,  wrath,  [jpotentice  et 
potesfatisj']  ability,  and  most  free  power,  in  the  salvation  of 
some  particular  men,  and  in  the  eternal  damnation  of  others ; 
which  neither  can  be  done,  nor  has  been  done,  without  the 
entrance  of  sin  into  the  world." 

3.  Second  Eeason. — Because  they  teach  "  that,  in  order  to 
attain  to  that  chief  and  supreme  end,  God  ordained  that  man 
should  sin  and  become  corrupt,  by  which  thing  God  might 
open  a  way  to  himself  for  the  execution  of  this  decree." 

4.  Third  Beason. — Because  they  teach  "that  God  has 
either  denied  to  man,  or  has  withdrawn  from  man,  before  he 
sinned,  grace  necessary  and  sufficient  to  avoid  sin  ;"  which  is 
tantamount  to  this — as  if  God  had  imposed  a  law  on  man 
which  was  simply  impossible  to  be  performed  or  observed  by 
his  very  nature. 

5.  Fourth  Beason. — Because  they  attribute  to  God  some 
acts,  partly  external,  partly  mediate,  and  partly  imn^ediate, 
which,  being  once  laid  down,  man  was  not  able  to  do  otherwise 
than^  commit  sin  by  necessity  of  a  consequent  and  antecedent 
to  the  thing  itself,  which  entirely  takes  away  all  liberty ;  yet 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


491 


without  this  liberty  a  man  cannot  be  considered,  or  reckoned, 
as  being  guilty  of  the  commission  of  sin. 

6.  A  Fifth  Reason. — ^Testimonies  of  the  same  description 
may  be  added  in  which  our  divines  assert,  in  express  words, 
that  "  the  reprobate  cannot  escape  the  necessity  of  sinning, 
especially  since  this  kind  of  necessity  is  injected  through  [or- 
dinatione]  the  appointment  of  God."  {Calvin^s  Institutes, 
lib.  2,  23.) 

XI.     ON  THE  FALL  OF  ADAM. 

1.  Adam  was  able  to  continue  in  goodness  and  to  refrain 
from  sinning,  and  this  in  reality  and  in  reference  to  the  issue, 
and  not  only  by  [potentid]  capability  not  to  be  brought  into 
action  on  account  of  some  preceding  decree  of  God,  or  rather 
not  possible  to  lead  to  an  act  by  that  preceding  decree. 

2.  Adam  sinned  freely  and  voluntarily,  without  any  neces- 
sity, eitlier  internal  or  external. 

3.  Adam  did  not  fall  through  the  decree  of  God,  neither 
through  being  ordained  to  fall  nor  through  desertion,  but 
through  the  mere  permission  of  God,  which  is  placed  in  sub- 
ordination to  no  predestination  either  to  salvation  or  to  death, 
but  which  belongs  to  providence  so  far  as  it  is  distinguished  in 
opposition  to  predestination. 

4.  Adam  did  not  fall  necessarily,  either  with  respect  to  a 
decree,  appointment,  desertion,  or  permission,  from  which  it  is 
evident  what  kind  of  judgment  ought  to  be  formed  concerning 
expressions  of  the  following  description  : 

5.  "  I  confess,  indeed,  that  by  the  will  of  God  all  the  sons 
of  Adam  have  fallen  into  this  miserable  condition  in  which 
they  are  bound  and  fastened."  {Calvin's  Institute,  lih.  3, 
cap.  23.) 

6.  "  They  deny,  in  express  words,  the  existence  of  this 
fact — that  it  was  decreed  by  God  that  Adam  should  perish  by 
his  own  defection." 

7.  "  God  foreknew  what  result  man  would  have,  because 
he  thus  ordained  it  by  his  decree." 


492 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


8.  "  God  not  only  foresaw  the  fall  of  the  first  man,  but  by 
his  own  will  he  [dispensavit]  ordained  it." 

XII.     ON  ORIGINAL  SIN. 

1.  Original  sin  is  not  that  actual  sin  by  which  Adam  trans- 
gressed the  law  concerning  the  tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil,  and  on  account  of  which  we  have  all  been  constituted 
sinners,  and  rendered  [rei]  obnoxious  or  liable  to  death  and 
condemnation. 

2.  Queries. — ^Is  original  sin  only  \j3arentia\  the  absence  or 
want  of  original  righteousness  and  of  primeval  holiness,  with 
an  inclination  to  commit  sin,  which  likewise  formerly  existed 
in  man,  though  it  was  not  so  vehement  nor  so  inordinate  as 
now  it  is,  on  account  of  the  lost  favor  of  God,  his  malediction, 
and  the  loss  of  that  good  by  which  that  inclination  was  re- 
duced to  order  ?  Or  is  it  a  certain  infused  habit  (or  acquired 
ingress)  contrary  to  righteousness  and  holiness,  after  that  sin 
had  been  committed  ? 

3.  Does  original  sin  render  men  obnoxious  to  the  wrath  of 
God,  when  they  have  been  previously  constituted  sinners  on 
account  of  the  actual  sin  of  Adam,  and  rendered  liable  to 
damnation  ? 

4.  Adam,  when  considered  in  this  state,  after  sin  and  prior 
to  restoration,  was  not  bound  at  once  to  punishment  and  obe- 
dience, but  only  to  punishment. 

Xni.     ON  THE  PREDESTINATION  OF  MAN,  CONSIDERED  PARTLY 
IN  HIS  PRIMEVAL  STATE,  AND  PARTLY  IN  THE  FALL. 

1.  It  is  rashly  asserted  that  "  the  matter  of  predestination, 
as  it  is  opposed  to  reprobation,  is  man  in  common  or  abso- 
lutely, if  regard  be  had  to  the  foreordaining  of  the  end ;  but 
if  regard  be  had  to  the  means  for  the  end^  it  is  man  about  to 
perish  by  and  in  himself  and  guilty  in  Adam."  {Trelcatii  In- 
stitut.^  lib.  2.    On  Predestination) 

2.  With  equal  infelicity  is  it  asserted  that  "  one  reprobation 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


493 


is  negative  or  passive,  another  affirmative  or  active — that  the 
former  is  before  all  things  and  causes  in  things  foreknown  and 
considered,  or  that  will  arise  from  things ;  and  that  this  act  is 
respective  of  sin,  and  is  called  jpredainnation.^'' 

3.  It  may  become  a  subject  uf  discussion  in  what  manner 
the  following  things  can  be  said  agreeably  to  this  doctrine : 
"  The  impulsive  cause  of  this  predestination  is  the  benevolent 
[affectus]  inclination  of  the  will  of  God  in  Christ ;  and  pre- 
destination is  an  eternal  act  of  God,  by  which  he  resolves  to 
make  in  Christ  some  creatures  partakers  of  his  grace  and 
glory." 

4.  This  is  a  stupid  assertion  :  "  The  just  desertion  of  God, 
by  which  he  does  not  confer  grace  on  a  reprobate  man,  and 
which  appertains  to  predestination  and  to  its  execution,  is  that 
of  exploration  or  trial."  This  also  cannot  be  reconciled  with 
the  expressions  in  the  preceding  paragraph. 

XIV.     ON  PREDESTINATION  CONSIDERED  AFTER  THE  FALL. 

1.  Queries. — Out  of  the  fallen  human  race,  or  out  of  the 
mass  of  corruption  and  perdition,  has  God  absolutely  chosen 
some  particular  men  to  life,  and  absolutely  reprobated  others 
to  death,  without  any  consideration  of  the  good  of  the  one  or 
of  the  evil  of  the  other?  And  frotn  a  just  decree,  which  is 
both  gracious  and  severe,  is  there  such  a  requisite  condition  as 
this  in  the  object  which  God  is  about  to  elect  and  to  save,  or 
to  reprobate  and  condemn  ? 

2.  Is  any  man  damned  with  death  eternal,  solely  on  account 
of  the  sin  of  Adam  ? 

3.  Are  those  who  are  thus  the  elect  necessarily  saved  on 
account  of  the  efficacy  of  grace,  which  has  been  destined  to 
them  only  that  they  may  not  be  able  to  do  otherwise  than  assent 
to  it,  as  it  is  irresistible  ? 

4.  Are  those  who  are  thus  the  re'pro'bate  necessarily  damned, 
because  either  no  grace  at  all,  or  not  sufficient,  has  been  des- 
tined to  them,  that  they  may  assent  to  it  and  believe  ? 

5.  Or  rather,  according  to  St.  Augustine,  Are  those  who 


494 


JAME3  ARMINIUS. 


are  thus  the  elect  assuredly  saved,  because  God  decreed  to  em- 
ploy grace  on  them  as  he  knew  was  suitable  and  congruous  that 
they  might  be  persuaded  and  saved ;  though  if  regard  be  had 
to  the  internal  efficacy  of  grace,  they  may  not  be  advanced  or 
benefited  by  it  ? 

6.  Are  those  who  have  thus  been  reprobated  certainly 
damned,  because  God  does  not  apply  to  them  grace  as  he 
knows  to  be  suitable  and  congruous,  though  in  the  mean  time 
they  [affioiantur']  are  supplied  with  sufficient  grace,  that  they 
may  be  able  to  yield  their  assent  and  be  saved  ? 

XV.     ON  THE  DECREES  OF  GOD  WHICH  CONCERN  THE  SALVATION 
OF  SINFUL  MEN,  ACCORDING  TO  HIS  OWN  SENSE. 

1.  The  first  decree  concerning  the  salvation  of  sinful  men, 
s  that  by  which  God  resolves  to  appoint  his  Son  Jesus  Christ 
as  a  savior,  mediator,  redeemer,  high  priest,  and  one  who  may 
expiate  sins,  by  the  merit  of  his  own  obedience  may  recover 
lost  salvation,  and  dispense  it  by  his  efficacy. 

2.  The  SECOND  decree  is  that  by  which  God  resolves  to  re- 
ceive into  [gratiam]  favor  those  who  repent  and  believe,  and 
to  save  in  Christ,  on  account  of  Christ,  and  through  Christ, 
those  who  persevere,  but  to  leave  under  sin  and  wrath  those 
who  are  impenitent  and  unbelievers,  and  to  condemn  them  as 
aliens  from  Christ. 

3.  The  THIRD  decree  is  that  by  which  God  resolves  to  ad- 
minister such  means  for  repentance  and  faith  as  are  necessary, 
sufficient,  and  efficacious.  And  this  administration  is  direct- 
ed according  to  the  wisdom  of  God,  by  which  he  knows  what 
is  suitable  or  becoming  to  mercy  and  severity ;  it  is  also  ac- 
cording to  his  righteousness,  by  which  he  is  prepared  to  fol- 
low and  execute  [the  directions]  of  his  wisdom. 

4.  From  these  follows  a  fourth  decree  concerning  the  sal- 
vation of  these  particular  persons,  and  the  damnation  of  those. 
This  rests  or  depends  on  the  prescience  and  foresight  of  God, 
by  which  he  foreknew  from  all  eternity  [qmnam]  what  men 
would,  through  such  administration,  believe  by  the  aid  of  pre- 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


495 


venting  or  preceding  grace,  and  would  persevere  by  the  aid  of 
subsequent  or  following  grace,  and  who  would  not  believe  and 
persevere. 

5.  Hence,  God  is  said  to  "know  those  who  are  his;"  and 
the  number  both  of  those  who  are  to  be  saved,  and  of  those 
who  are  to  be  damned,  is  certain  and  fixed,  and  the  quod  and 
the  qui^  [the  substance  and  the  parties  of  whom  it  is  compos- 
ed,] or,  as  the  phrase  of  the  schools  is,  both  materially  and 
formally, 

6.  The  second  decree  [described  in  §  11]  is  predestination 
to  salvation^  which  is  the  foundation  of  Christianity,  salvation, 
and  of  the  assurance  of  salvation ;  it  is  also  the  matter  of  the 
gospel,  and  [summal  the  substance  of  the  doctrine  taught  by 
the  apostles. 

7.  But  that  predestination  by  which  God  is  said  to  have  de- 
creed to  save  particular  creatures  and  persons  and  to  endue 
them  with  faith,  is  neither  the  foundation  of  Christianity,  of 
salvation,  nor  of  the  assurance  of  salvation.  j 

XVI.     ON  CHRIST. 

1.  Queries. — After  the  entrance  of  sin  into  the  world,  was 
there  no  other  remedy  for  the  expiation  of  sin,  or  of  render- 
ing satisfaction  to  God,  than  through  the  death  of  the  Son  of 
God? 

2.  Had  the  human  nature  in  Christ  any  other  thing,  than 
substance  alone,  immediately  from  the  Logos,  that  is,  without 
the  intervention  of  the  Holy  Spirit  ? 

3.  Have  the  holy  conception  of  Christ  through  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  his  \nativitas\  birth  from  the  Virgin  Mary,  [hor- 
sum  tendat,']  this  tendency — to  cover  the  corruption  of  our 
nature  lest  it  should  come  into  the  sight  of  God  ? 

4.  Does  the  holy  life  of  Christ,  in  which  he  fulfilled  all 
righteousness  according  to  the  prescript  of  the  moral  law  con- 
cerning the  love  of  God  and  of  our  neighbor,  conduce  only  to 
this  purpose — that  Christ  may  be  a  pure  and  innocent  High 
Priest  and  an  uncontaminated  victim  ?    But  was  it  not  like- 


496 


JAMES  AEMINITJS. 


wise  for  this  purpose — that  this  righteousness  [of  the  holy  life 
of  Christ]  may  be  our  righteousness  before  God,  and  by  this 
means  performed  by  him  for  us,  that  is,  in  our  name  and  in 
our  stead? 

5.  Do  those  things  which  Christ  suffered  prior  to  his  being 
placed  before  the  tribunal  of  Pilate,  concur  with  those  which 
he  afterwards  endured,  for  the  purging  away  and  expiation 
of  sins,  and  the  redemption  and  reconciliation  of  sinners  with 
God? 

6.  Was  the  oblation  by  which  Christ  offered  himself  to 
the  Father  as  a  victim  for  sin,  so  made  on  the  cross  that 
he  has  not  offered  himself  and  his  blood  to  his  Father  in 
Heaven  ? 

T.  Is  not  the  oblation  by  which  Christ  presents  himself 
to  his  Father  in  heaven  sprinkled  with  his  own  blood,  a 
peri)etual  and  continuous  act,  on  which  intercession  rests  or 
depends  ? 

8.  Is  not  the  redemption  which  has  been  obtained  by  the 
blood  of  Christ,  common  to  every  man  in  particular,  accord- 
ing to  the  love  and  affection  of  God  by  which  he  gave  his  Son 
for  the  world,  though,  according  to  the  peremptory  decree 
concerning  the  salvation  of  believers  alone,  it  belongs  only  to 
some  men  ? 

XVII.    ON  THE  VOCATION  OF  SINNEES  TO  COMMUNION  WITH  CHRIST, 
AND  TO  A  PAETICIPATION  OF  HIS  BENEFITS. 

1.  Sinful  man,  after  the  perpetration  of  sin,  has  such  a 
knowledge  of  the  law  as  is  sufficient  for  accusing,  convicting, 
and  condemning  him  ;  and  this  knowledge  itself  is  capable 
of  being  employed  by  God  when  calling  him  to  Christ,  that 
he  may,  through  it,  compel  man  to  repent  and  to  flee  to 
Christ. 

2.  An  unregenerate  man  is  capable  of  omitting  more  evil  ex- 
ternal works  than  he  omits,  and  can  perform  more  outward 
works  which  have  been  commanded  by  God  than  he  actually 
performs ;  that  is,  it  is  possible  for  him  to  rule  [loco-motivam] 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


497 


Lis  inducements  for  abstaining  in  another  and  a  better  man- 
ner than  that  in  which  he  does  rule  them ;  although  if  he  were 
to  do  so,  he  would  merit  nothing  bj  that  deed. 

3.  The  distribution  of  vocation  into  internal  and  external^ 
is  not  the  distribution  of  a  genus  into  its  species,  or  of  a  whole 
into  its  parts. 

4.  Internal  vocation  [contingit]  is  granted  even  to  those 
who  do  not  comply  with  the  call. 

5.  All  unregenerate  persons  have  freedom  of  will,  and  a  ca- 
pability of  resisting  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  rejecting  the  proffered 
grace  of  God,  of  despising  the  counsel  of  God  against  them- 
selves, of  refusing  to  accept  the  gospel  of  grace,  and  of  not 
opening  to  Him  who  knocks  at  the  door  of  the  heart ;  and 
these  things  they  can  actually  do,  without  any  difference  of 
the  elect  and  of  the  reprobate. 

6.  Whomsoever  God  calls,  he  calls  them  seriously,  with  a 
will  desirous  of  their  rejDcntance  and  salvation.  Neither  is 
there  any  volition  of  God  about  or  concerning  those  whom  he 
calls  as  being  uniformly  considered,  that  is,  either  affirmative- 
ly or  negatively  contrary  to  this  will. 

7.  God  is  not  bound  to  employ  all  the  modes  which  are 
possible  to  him  for  the  salvation  of  all  men.  He  has  perform- 
ed his  [officio]  part,  when  he  has  employed  either  one  or  more 
of  these  possible  means  for  saving. 

8.  "That  man  should  be  rendered  inexcusable,"  is  neither 
the  proximate  end,  nor  that  which  was  intended  by  God, 
to  the  divine  vocation  when  it  is  first  made  and  has  not  been 
repulsed. 

9.  The  doctrine  which  is  manifested  only  for  the  purpose 
of  rendering  those  who  hear  it  inexcusable,  cannot  render  them 
inexcusable  either  by  right  or  by  efficacy. 

10.  The  right  of  God — by  which  he  can  require  faith  in 
Christ  from  those  who  do  not  possess  the  capability  of  believ- 
ing in  him,  and  on  whom  he  refuses  to  bestow  the  grace 
which  is  necessary  and  sufficient  for  believing,  without  any 
demerit  on  account  of  grace  repulsed — does  not  rest  or  depend 
on  the  fact  that  God  gave  to  Adam^  in  his  primeval  state^ 


498 


JAMES  ARMUnUS. 


and  in  him  to  all  men^  the  capability  of  helieving  in 
Christ. 

11.  The  right  of  God — bj  which  he  can  condemn  those 
who  reject  the  gospel  of  grace,  and  by  which  he  actually  con- 
demns the  disobedient — does  not  rest  or  depend  on  this  fact, 
that  all  men  have,  hy  their  own  faulty  lost  the  capability  of  be- 
lieving which  they  received  in  Adam, 

12.  Sufficient  grace  must  necessarily  be  laid  down ;  yet 
this  sufficient  grace,  through  the  fault  of  him  to  whom  {con- 
tingit\  it  is  granted,  does  not  [always]  obtain  its  effect.  [*S'^- 
cus'\  Were  the  fact  otherwise,  the  justice  of  God  could  not  be 
defended  in  his  condemning  those  who  do  not  believe. 

13.  The  efficacy  of  saving  grace  is  not  consistent  with  that 
omnipotent  'act  of  God,  by  which  he  so  inwardly  acts  in  the 
heart  and  mind  of  man,  that  he  on  whom  that  act  is  impress- 
ed cannot  do  any  other  than  consent  to  God  who  calls 
him ;  or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  grace  is  not  an  irresisti- 
ble force. 

14.  Query. — Are  efficacious  and  sufficient  grace  correctly 
distinguished  according  to  a  congruous  or  suitable  vocation 
and  one  that  is  incongruous,  so  that  it  may  be  called  efficacious 
grace,  which  God  employs  according  to  his  purpose  of  abso- 
lutely saving  some  particular  man,  as  he  knows  it  to  be  con- 
gruous or  suitable  that  this  man  should  be  moved  and  persua- 
ded to  obedience ;  and  so  that  it  may  be  called  sufficient  grace 
which  he  employs,  not  for  such  a  purpose,  though,  from  his 
general  love  towards  all  mankind,  some  are  affected  or  moved 
by  it,  on  whom,  by  a  peremptory  decree,  he  had  resolved  not 
to  have  mercy  ? 

15.  The  efficacy  which  is  distinguished  from  efficiency  itself, 
seems  not  to  differ  at  all  from  siffi^ciency. 

16.  Those  who  are  obedient  to  the  vocation  or  call  of  God, 
freely  yield  their  assent  to  grace ;  yet  they  are  previously  ex- 
cited, impelled,  drawn  and  assisted  by  grace  ;  and  in  the  very 
moment  in  which  they  actually  assent,  they  possess  the  capa- 
bility of  not  assenting. 

lY.  In  the  very  commencement  of  his  conversion,  man  con- 


CERTAIN  AETICLES. 


499 


ducts  himself  in  a  purely  passive  manner ;  that  is,  though,  by 
a  vital  act,  that  is,  [sensio]  by  feeling,  he  has  a  perception  of 
the  grace  which  calls  him,  yet  he  can  do  no  other  than  receive 
it  and  feel  it.  But,  when  he  feels  grace  affecting  or  inclining 
his  mind  and  heart,  he  freely  assents  to  it,  so  that  he  is  able 
at  the  same  time  to  withhold  his  assent. 

XVin.     ON  PENITENCE. 

1.  The  doctrine  concerning  repentance  is  not  legal  but  evan- 
gelical ;  that  is,  it  appertains  to  the  gospel  and  not  to  the  law, 
although  the  law  solicits  and  impels  to  repentance. 

2.  The  knowledge  or  confession  of  sins,  sorrow  on  account 
of  sin  and  a  desire  for  deliverance,  with  a  resolution  to  avoid 
sin,  are  pleasing  to  God  as  [initialia]  the  very  beginnings  of 
conversion. 

3.  In  propriety  of  speech,  these  things  are  not  the  mor- 
tification itself  of  the  flesh  or  of  sin  but  necessarily  pre- 
cede it. 

4.  Repentance  is  prior  to  faith  in  Christ ;  but  it  is  posteri- 
or to  that  faith  by  which  we  believe  that  God  is  willing  to 
receive  into  his  favor  the  penitent  sinner. 

5.  Queries. — Is  the  repentance  of  Judas  properly  called 
legal  7 

6.  Was  the  penitence  or  repentance  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Tyre  and  Sidon,  of  which  Christ  speaks  in  Matthew  xi,  21, 
dissembled  and  feigned,  or  true  repentance  ? 

XIX.     ON  FAITH. 

1.  Justifying  faith  is  not  that  by  which  any  one  believes 
that  his  sins  are  remitted  to  him  for  the  sake  of  Christ ;  for 
\illd\  the  latter  faith  follows  justification  itself  or  remission  of 
sins,  which  is  the  effect  of  justifying  faith. 

2.  Justifying  faith  is  not  that  by  which  any  one  believes 
himself  to  be  elected. 

3.  All  men  are  not  bound  to  believe  themselves  to  be 
elected. 


500 


JAMES  ABMTNIUS 


4.  The  knowledge  and  faith  by  which  any  one  knows  and 
believes  that  [credere]  he  is  in  possession  of  faith,  is  prior  by 
nature  to  that  knowledge  and  faith  by  which  any  one  knows 
and  believes  himself  to  be  elected. 

5.  From  these  remarks,  some  judgment  may  be  formed 
concerning  that  which  is  sometimes  asserted,  "A  believing 
and  elect  person  is  bound  to  believe  that  he  is  elected." 

6.  Justifying  faith  is  that  by  which  men  believe  in  Jesus 
Christ,  as  in  the  savior  of  those  universally  who  believe,  and 
of  each  of  them  in  particular,  even  the  Savior  of  him  who, 
through  Christ,  believes  in  God,  who  justifies  the  ungodly. 

T.  Evangelical  and  saving  faith  is  of  such  vast  excellency  as 
to  exceed  the  entire  nature  of  man,  and  all  his  understanding, 
even  that  of  Adam,  when  placed  in  a  state  of  innocence. 

8.  God  cannot  of  right  require  faith  in  Christ  from  that 
man  whom,  by  an  absolute  will,  he  has  reprobated,  either 
without  consideration  of  any  sin,  or  as  fallen  in  Adam ;  there- 
fore, it  was  not  his  will  that  Christ  should  be  of  the  least  ad- 
vantage to  this  man ;  or,  rather,  he  willed  that  Christ  should 
not  profit  him. 

9.  Faith  is  a  gracious  and  gratuitous  gift  of  God,  bestowed 
according  to  the  administration  of  the  means  necessary  to 
conduce  to  the  end,  that  is,  according  to  such  an  administra- 
tion as  the  justice  of  God  requires,  either  towards  the  side  of 
mercy  or  towards  that  of  severity.  It  is  a  gift  which  is  not 
bestowed  according  to  an  absolute  will  of  saving  some  par- 
ticular men  ;  for  it  is  a  condition  required  in  the  object  to  be 
saved,  and  it  is  in  fact  a  condition  before  it  is  the  means  for 
obtaining  salvation. 

10.  Saving  faith  is  that  of  the  elect  of  God  ;  it  is  not  the 
faith  of  all  men,  of  perverse  and  wicked  men,  not  of  those 
who  repel  the  word  of  grace,  and  account  themselves  unworthy 
of  life  eternal,  not  of  those  who  resist  the  Holy  Spirit,  not  of 
those  who  reject  the  counsel  of  God  against  themselves,  nor  of 
those  who  have  not  been  ordained  to  life  eternal.  'No  man 
believes  in  Christ  except  he  who  has  been  previously  disposed 
and  prepared,  by  preventing  or  preceding  grace,  to  receive 
life  eternal  on  that  condition  on  which  God  wills  to  bestow 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


oOl 


it,  according  to  the  following  passage  of  Scripture  :  "If  any 
man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of  the  doctrine,  wheth- 
er it  be  of  God,  or  whether  I  speak  of  myself."  (John 
yii,  17.) 

XX.     ON  REGENERATION  AND  THE  REGENERATE. 

1.  The  proximate  subject  of  regeneration,  which  is  effected 
in  the  present  life  by  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  is  the  mind  and  the 
affections  of  man,  or  the  will  considered  according  to  the  mode 
of  nature,  not  the  will  considered  according  to  the  mpde  of 
liberty.  It  is  not  the  body  of  man,  though  man,  when  renew* 
ed  by  regeneration  through  his  mind  and  feelings,  actually 
wills  in  a  good  manner,  and  performs  well  through  the  instru- 
ments of  the  body. 

2.  Though  regeneration  is  not  perfected  in  a  moment,  but 
by  certain  steps  and  intervals  ;  yet,  as  soon  as  ever  it  is  per- 
fected according  to  its  essence,  that  is,  through  the  renovation 
of  the  mind  and  affections,  it  renders  the  man  spiritual,  and 
capable  of  resisting  sin  through  the  assisting  grace  of  God. 
Hence,  also,  from  the  Spirit,  which  predominates  in  him,  he  is 
called  spiritual  and  not  carnal,  though  he  still  has  within  him 
the  flesh  lusting  against  the  Spirit.  For  these  two,  a  carnal 
man  and  a  spiritual  man,  are  so  denominated  in  opposition, 
and  according  to  [that  which  is  in  each  of  them]  the  more 
powerful,  prevailing  or  predominant  party. 

3.  The  regenerate  are  able  to  perform  more  true  good,  and 
of  such  as  is  pleasing  to  God,  than  they  actually  perform, and 
to  omit  more  evil  than  they  omit ;  and,  therefore,  if  they  do 
not  perform  and  omit  what  they  ought  to  do,  that  must  not 
be  ascribed  to  any  decree  of  God  or  inefficacy  of  divine  grace, 
but  it  must  be  attributed  to  the  negligence  of  the  regenerate 
themselves. 

4.  He  who  asserts  that  "  it  is  possible  for  the  regenerate, 
through  the  grace  of  Christ,  perfectly  to  fulfill  the  law  in  the 
present  life,"  is  neither  a  Pelagian,  nor  inflicts  any  injury  on 
the  grace  of  God,  nor  establishes  justification  through  works. 


502 


JAMES  AEMINTCS. 


5.  The  regenerate  are  capable  of  committing  sin  designedly 
and  in  opposition  to  their  consciences,  and  of  so  laying  waste 
their  consciences,  through  sin,  as  to  hear  nothing  from  them 
except  the  sentence  of  condemnation. 

6.  The  regenerate  are  capable  of  grieving  the  Holy  Spirit 
by  their  sins,  so  that,  for  a  season,  until  they  suffer  themselves 
to  be  brought  back  to  repentance,  he  does  not  exert  his  power 
and  efficacy  in  them. 

7.  Some  of  the  regenerate  actually  thus  sin,  thus  lay  waste 
their  conscience,  and  thus  grieve  the  Holy  Spirit. 

8.  If  David  had  died  in  the  very  moment  in  which  he  had 
Sinned  against  Uriah  by  adultery  and  murder,  he  would  have 
been  condemned  to  death  eternal. 

9.  God  truly  hates  the  sins  of  the  regenerate  and  of  the 
elect  of  God,  and  indeed  so  much  the  more,  as  those  who  thus 
sin  have  received  more  benefits  from  God,  and  a  greater  power 
of  resisting  sin. 

10.  There  are  distinctions  by  which  a  man  is  said  to  sin 
with  a  full  will,  or  with  a  will  that  is  not  full — fully  to  destroy 
conscience,  or  not  fully  but  only  partly,  and  to  sin  according 
to  his  unregenerate  part.  When  these  distinctions  are  em- 
ployed in  the  sense  in  which  some  persons  use  them,  they  are 
noxious  to  piety  and  injurious  to  good  morals. 

XXI.     ON  THE  PERSEVERANCE  OF  SAINTS. 

1.  Queries. — Is  it  possible  for  true  believers  to  fall  away 
totally  and  finally : 

2.  Do  some  of  them,  in  reality,  totally  and  finally  fall  from 
the  faith? 

3.  The  opinion  which  denies  "  that  true  believers  and  re- 
generate persons  are  either  capable  of  falling  away  or  actually 
do  fall  away  from  the  faith  totally  and  finally,"  was  never,  from 
the  very  times  of  the  apostles  down  to  the  present  day,  ac- 
counted by  the  church  as  a  catholic  doctrine.  I^either  has 
that  which  affirms  the  contrary  ever  been  reckoned  as  a  hereti- 
cal opinion ;  nay,  that  which  affirms  it  possible  for  believers 


CEKTAIN  ARTICLES. 


603 


to  fall  away  from  the  faith,  has  always  had  more  supporters 
in  the  church  of  Christ,  than  that  which  denies  its  possibility 
or  its  actually  occurring. 

XXn.     ON  THE  ASSURANCE  OF  SALVATION. 

1.  Queries. — Is  it  possible  for  any  believer,  without  a  spe- 
cial revelation,  to  be  certain  or  assured  that  he  will  not  de- 
cline or  fall  away  from  the  faith  ? 

2.  Are  those  who  have  faith,  bound  to  believe  that  they 
will  not  decline  from  the  faith  ? 

3.  The  affirmative  of  either  of  these  questions  was  never 
accounted  in  the  church  of  Christ  as  a  catholic  doctrine ;  and 
the  denial  of  either  uf  them  has  never  been  adjudged  by  the 
church  universal  as  a  heresy. 

4.  The  persuasion  by  which  any  believer  assuredly  per- 
suades himself  that  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  decline  from 
the  faith,  or  that,  at  least,  he  will  not  decline  from  the  faith, 
does  not  conduce  so  much  to  consolation  against  despair  or 
against  the  doubting  that  is  adverse  to  faith  and  hope,  as  it 
contributes  to  security,  a  thing  directly  opposed  to  that  most 
salutary  fear  with  which  we  are  commanded  to  work  out  our 
salvation,  and  which  is  exceedingly  necessary  in  this  scene  of 
temptations. 

5.  He  who  is  of  opinion  that  it  is  possible  for  him  to  de- 
cline from  the  faith,  and  who,  therefore,  is  afraid  lest  he  should 
decline,  is  neither  destitute  of  necessary  consolation,  nor  is  he 
on  this  account,  tormented  with  anxiety  of  mind.  For  it  suf- 
fices to  inspire  consolation  and  to  exclude  anxiety,  when  he 
knows  that  he  will  decline  from  the  faith  through  no  force  of 
Satan,  of  sin,  or  of  the  world,  and  through  no  [afectione]  in- 
clination or  weakness  of  his  own  flesh,  unless  he  willingly  and 
of  his  own  accord,  yield  to  temptation,  and  neglect  to  work 
out  his  salvation  in  a  conscientious  manner. 


504 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


XXm.     ON  THE   JTSTIFICATIOX  OF  MAN  AS  A  SINNER,  BUT  YET 
A  BELIETEE,  BEFORE  GOD. 

1.  Queries. — Wsls  it  possible  for  the  justice  of  God  to  be 
satisfied  unless  the  law  were  likewise  satisfied  ? 

2.  Is  the  satisfaction  which  has  been  rendered  in  Christ  to 
the  justice  of  God,  the  same  as  that  rendered  to  the  law 
through  Christ  ? 

3.  Do  legal  righteousness  and  that  of  the  gospel  differ  in 
essence  ?  Or,  Is  the  essence  of  both  of  them  the  same,  that 
is,  the  matter — the  obedience  performed  to  God,  and  the  uni- 
versal forr/i — the  necessary  conformity  to  the  law  ? 

Are  there  three  parts  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ  by 
which  believers  are  constituted  righteous  ?  Is  the  Jirst  o 
them  the  holiness  of  the  nature  of  Christ,  which  is  denomi- 
nated habitual  righteousness  7  Is  the  second  those  sufferino^s 
which,  from  infancy  to  the  moment  ot  his  decease,  he  sus- 
tained on  our  account,  and  is  this  denominated  his  'passive  obe- 
dience^ or  that  of  his  death?  Is  the  third  the  most  perfect, 
nay,  the  more  than  perfect  fulfillment  of  the  moral  law,  (add 
also  that  of  the  ceremonial  law,)  through  the  whole  of  his  life 
to  the  period  of  his  death ;  and  is  this  denominated  his  active 
obedience,  or  that  of  his  life  ? 

5.  TTere  not  the  acts  of  that  obedience  which  Christ  per- 
formed, and  by  which  we  are  justified,  imposed  on  him  accord- 
ing to  the  peculiar  command  of  the  Father,  and  according  to 
a  peculiar  compact  or  covenant  entered  into  between  him  and 
the  Father,  in  which  he  prescribed  and  stipulated  those  acts  of 
obedience,  with  the  addition  of  a  promise  that  he  should  obtain 
eternal  redemption  for  them,  [the  human  race,]  and  should  see 
his  seed,  whom  this  obedience  should  justify  through  his 
knowledge,  that  is,  through  faith  in  him  ? 

6.  To  which  of  the  ofiices  of  Christ  do  those  acts  of  obedi- 
ence belong  ? 

T.  Is  the  righteousness  of  Christ  the  righteousness  of  a 
believer  or  of  an  elect  pei-son,  before  God  imputes  it  to  him  ? 

8.  Does  God  impute  this  righteousness  to  him  before  he  jus- 
tifies him  through  faith  ? 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES.  505 

9.  Or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  Is  the  object  about  which 
God  is  occupied  in  the  act  of  justification,  an  elect  person,  un- 
righteous indeed  in  himself  but  righteous  in  Christ  his  head ; 
so  that  he  [judicet']  accounts  him  righteous  because  he  is 
ah'eadj  righteous  in  Christ,  that  is,  because  the  punishment 
due  to  him  has  been  paid  and  endured  by  him  in  his  Surety 
and  Head,  or  because  he  has  thus  performed  the  obedience 
which  was  due  from  him  ? 

10.  Has  an  elect  person  really  endured  punishment  in 
Christ  and  performed  obedience,  or  only  in  the  divine  estima- 
tion or  reckoning?  And  is  this  divine  estimation,  by  which 
the  elect  person  is  reckoned  to  have  endured  punishment  and 
performed  obedience,  an  act  preceding  justification? 

11.  Does  not  the  act  of  acceptation,  by  which  God  accepted 
the  obedience  of  his  Son,  precede  the  oblation  by  which, 
through  the  gospel,  he  offers  his  Son  for  righteousness  ? 

12.  Is  the  accepted  imputation  of  the  righteousness  of 
Christ  justification  itself,  or  a  preliminary  to  justification? 

13.  Is  not  the  act  of  apprehension,  by  which  faith  appre- 
hends Christ  and  his  righteousness,  or  Christ  for  righteousness, 
prior  to  justification  itself? 

14.  If  this  act  [of  apprehension]  be  prior  to  justification, 
how  is  faith  the  instrumental  cause  of  our  justification  ;  that 
is,  at  once  the  instrumental  cause  of  the  apprehending  which 
precedes  justification,  and  of  justification  itself  which  succeeds 
this  apprehending? 

15.  Or,  Does  not  faith  apprehend  Christ  offered  for  right- 
eousness, before  faith  is  imputed  for  righteousness  ? 

16.  In  this  enunciation,  faith  is  imputed  to  the  believer 
for  righteousness,"  is  the  word  "  faith"  to  he  properli/  received 
as  the  instrumental  act  by  which  Christ  has  been  apprehended 
for  righteousness  ?  Or  is  it  to  be  improperly  received,  that  is, 
by  a  metonymy,  for  the  very  object  which  faith  apprehends  ? 

17.  Is  this  phrase,  "  faith  is  received  relatively  and  instru- 
mentall}^,"  the  same  as  by  the  word  faith  is  signified,  through 
a  metonymy,  the  very  object  of  faith"  ? 

18.  Or,  Is  it  the  same  thing  to  say  "  we  are  justified  by 

33  VOL.  II. 


606  JAMES  AKMINIUS. 

faith  correlativelj,  and  as  it  is  an  instrumental  act,  by  which 
we  apprehend  Christ  for  righteousness"  as  we  say  "  we  are 
justified  by  obedience  or  righteousness"  ? 

19.  May  the  righteousness  of  Christ  be  correctly  said  to  be 
graciously  imputed  for  righteousness,  or  to  be  graciously  ac- 
counted for  righteousness  ? 

20.  When  the  apostle  expresses  himself  in  this  manner, 
"  Faith  is  imputed  for  righteousness,"  must  not  this  be  under- 
stood concerning  the  imputation  which  is  made,  not  according 
to  debt,  but  according  to  grace  ? 

21.  May  that  of  which  we  are  made  partakers  through  faith, 
or  by  faith,  be  called  the  instrumental  effect  of  faith  ? 

22.  "When  God  has  decreed  to  justify  no  one  through  grace 
,and  mercy,  except  him  who  believes  in  Christ,  and,  therefore, 
through  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  requires  faith  in  Christ 
from  him  who  desires  to  be  justified,  can  it  not  be  said  "  when 
God  is  graciously  judging  according  to  the  gospel,  he  is  occu- 
pied about  faith,  as  about  a  condition,  which  is  required  from, 
and  performed  by,  him  who  appears  before  the  throne  of  grace 
to  be  judged  and  justified"? 

23.  If  this  may  be  asserted,  what  crime  is  there  in  saying 
"  through  the  gratuitous  and  gracious  acceptance  [of  God]  is 
faith  accounted  for  righteousness  on  account  of  the  obedience 
of  Christ"? 

24.  Is  "If  the  work  of  men  who  are  born  again  were  per- 
fect, they  might  be  justified  by  them,  though  they  may  have 
perpetrated  many  evil  works  when  [or  before]  they  obtain  the 
remission  of  them"  a  correct  assertion  ? 

XXIV.    ON  THE  GOOD  WORKS  OF  BELIEVEKS. 

1.  Queries. — Is  it  truly  said,  concerning  the  good  works  of 
believers  "  they  are  unclean  like  a  menstruous  cloth"?  And 
does  this  confession,  "  We  are  all  as  an  unclean  thing,  and  all 
our  righteousness  are  as  filthy  rags,"  &c.,  (Isaiah  Ixiv,  6,) 
belong  to  those  works  ? 

2.  In  what  sense  is  it  correctly  said  "Believers  sin  mortally 
in  every  one  of  their  good  works"  ? 


CERTAIN  ABTIOLES. 


507 


3.  Do  the  good  works  of  believers  come  into  the  judgment 
of  God  so  far  only  as  they  are  testimonies  of  faith  ;  or  like- 
wise so  far  as  they  have  been  prescribed  by  God,  and  sanc- 
tioned and  honored  with  the  promise  of  a  reward,  although 
this  reward  be  not  bestowed  on  them  except  "  of  grace"  united 
with  mercy,  and  on  account  of  Christ,  whom  God  hath 
appointed  and  set  forth  as  a  propitiatory  through  faith  in  his 
blood,  and,  therefore,  with  [intuitu]  reference  to  faith  in 
Christ? 

XXV.     ON  PEAYER. 

1.  Queries. — Does  prayer,  or  the  invocation  of  God,  hold 
relation  only  to  the  performance  of  worship  to  his  honor  ?  Or, 
does  it  likewise  bear  the  relation  of  means  necessary  for  ob- 
taining that  which  is  asked — means,  indeed,  which  God  fore- 
saw would  be  employed  before  he  absolutely  determined  to 
bestow  the  blessing  on  the  petitioner  ? 

2.  Is  the  faith  with  which  we  ought  to  pray,  that  faith  by 
which  he  who  prays  believes  ^suredly  that  he  will  obtain 
what  he  asks  ?  Or  is  it  that  faith  by  which  he  is  assuredly 
persuaded,  that  he  is  asking  according  to  the  will  of  God,  and 
will  obtain  what  he  asks,  provided  God  knows  that  it  will 
conduce  to  his  glory  and  to  the  salvation  of  the  petitioner  ? 

XXVI.    ON  the  infants  of  believers  when  they  are 
offered  for  baptism. 

Query. — ^When  the  children  of  believers  are  offered  for 
baptism,  are  they  considered  as  "  the  children  of  wrath,"  or 
as  the  children  of  God  and  of  grace  ?  And  if  they  be  con- 
sidered in  both  ways,  is  this  relation  according  to  the  same 
time,  or  according  to  different  times  ? 

ON  the  supper  of  the  lord. 

Query. — Is  not  the  proximate  and  most  appropriate,  and^ 
therefore,  the  immediate  end  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  both  as  it 


508 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


was  at  first  instituted  and  as  it  is  now  used,  the  memory,  or 
commemoration,  or  annunciation  of  the  Lord's  death,  and  this 
with  thanksgiving  for  the  gift  of  God,  in  delivering  up  his 
Son  to  death  for  us,  and  in  having  given  his  flesh  to  be  eaten 
and  his  blood  to  be  drank  through  faith  in  him  ? 

XXVm.     ON  MAGISTRACY. 

1.  The  chief  magistrate  is  not  correctly  denominated  po- 
litical or  secular,,  because  those  epithets  are  opposed  to  the 
ecclesiastical  and  spiritual  power. 

2.  In  the  hands  and  at  the  disposal  of  the  chief  magistrate 
is  placed,  under  God,  the  supreme  and  sovereign  power  of 
caring  and  providing  for  his  subjects,  and  of  governing  them, 
with  respect  to  animal  and  spiritual  life. 

8.  The  care  of  religion  has  been  committed  bj  God  to  the 
chief  magistrate,  more  than  to  priests  and  to  ecclesiastical 
persons. 

4.  It  is  in  the  power  of  the  magistrate  to  enact  laws  con- 
cerning civil  and  ecclesiastical  polity,  yet  not  unless  those 
persons  have  been  asked  and  consulted  who  are  the  best  versed 
in  spiritual  matters,  and  who  are  peculiarly  designed  for 
teaching  the  church. 

5.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  magistrate  to  preserve  and  defend 
the  ecclesiastical  ministry — to  appoint  the  ministers  of  God's 
word,  after  they  have  previously  undergone  a  lawful  examina- 
tion before  a  presbytery — to  take  care  that  they  perform  their 
duty — to  require  an  account  of  their  ministry — -to  admonish 
and  incite  those  among  them  who  are  negligent — to  bestow 
rewards  on  those  ministers  who  preside  well  over  their  flocks, 
and  to  remove  such  as  are  pertinaciously  negligent,  or  who 
bring  a  scandal  on  the  church. 

6.  Also  to  invoke  councils,  whether  general,  national  or 
provincial ;  by  his  own  authority  to  preside  as  moderator  of 
the  assembly,  either  in  person  or  through  deputies  suitable  for 
discharging  such  an  office. 

7.  Query. — Is  it  useful  to  ecclesiastical  conventions  or  as- 
Bemblies,  that  those  persons  preside  over  them  whose  interest 


CERTAIN  ARTICLES. 


509 


it  is  that  matters  of  religion  and  church  discipline  should  be 
transacted  in  this  manner  rather  than  in  that  ? 

8.  For  the  discharge  of  these  duties,  the  magistrate  must 
understand  those  mysteries  of  religion  which  are  absolutely- 
necessary  for  the  salvation  of  men  ;  for  in  this  part  [of  his  high 
office]  he  cannot  depend  upon  and  confide  in  the  conscience 
of  another  person. 

9.  The  Christian  magistrate  both  presides  in  those  ecclesi- 
astical assemblies  in  which  he  is  present,  and  pronounces  a 
decisive  and  definitive  sentence,  or  has  the  right  of  delivering 
a  decisive  and  definitive  sentence. 

XXIX.     O^r  THE  CHURCH  OF  ROME. 

1.  Queries. — Must  a  difference  be  made  between  the  court 
of  Rome^  (that  is,  the  Roman  pontiff,  the  cardinals,  and  the 
other  sworn  retainers  and  satelites  of  his  kingdom,)  and  the 
Church  which  is  denominated  Romish  ? 

2.  Can  those  persons  by  no  means  be  called  "  the  church  of 
Christ,"  who,  having  been  deceived  by  the  Roman  pontiff 
consider  him  as  the  successor  of  St.  Peter  and  the  head  of  the 
church? 

3.  Has  God  sent  a  bill  of  divorcement  to  those  persons,  so 
that  he  does  not  at  all  acknowledge  them  as  his,  any  more 
than  he  does  Mahometans  and  Jews  ? 


A  LETTER 

Olf 

THE  SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


to  john  uytenbogarda  his  most  dear  and  peculiarly  be- 
loved brother  in  christ,  james  armlnius  wishes  health 
and  his  welfare  through  christ. 

Most  Friendly  of  Mankind  : 

As  you  intend  soon  to  preach  before  the  members  of  your 
church  on  the  Sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost^  you  request  that  I 
will  disclose  to  you  my  medications  and  musings  on  that  sub- 
ject, on  which  you  had  also  previously  asked  my  opinion  ;  but 
at  that  time,  it  was  not  in  my  power  to  comply  with  your  re- 
quest ;  for  I  had  formed  no  distinct  conception  in  my  mind  re- 
specting it,  neither  have  my  sentiments  upon  it  yet  attained 
to  any  certain  and  full  persuasion.  But  my  slight  musings 
and  meditations,  I  neither  feel  any  desire  of  denying  to  you, 
nor  would  it  be  my  duty  to  withhold  them  from  one  to  whom 
I  have  long  ago  transferred  the  plenary  right  of  requiring  and 
even  commanding  any  thing  from  me.  Nor  will  I  suffer  my- 
self to  be  seduced  from  this  desire  of  obeying  you  by  any 
false  and  rustic  shame,  though  I  know  that  my  contemplations 
on  this  question,  are  such  as  cannot  satisfy  you,  since,  in  fact, 
they  are  not  much  approved  by  myself.  For,  of  what  kind 
soever  they  may  be,  I  am  aware  that  they  deserve  to  obtain 
some  excuse,  as  they  are  concerning  that  question,  than  which 
scarcely  any  one  of  greater  dif&culty  can  be  found  in  the  whole 


4 


512 


JAMES  AEMmiUS. 


Scripture,  as  St.  Augustine  testifies  when  professedly  treating 
upon  this  subject,  (torn.  19,  foL  9,)  in  his  explication  of  Matt, 
xii,  31,  32.  Besides,  I  hope  and  feel  fully  persuaded,  that  you 
will  so  polish  these,  my  rough  notes,  that  I  may  afterwards 
receive  them  from  you  not  only  with  interest,  hut  also  others 
which  will  be  able  entirely  to  complete  my  wishes. 

But  I  will  not  at  present  examine  what  St.  Augustine  has 
produced  on  the  same  passage,  when  writing  about  this  sin  ; 
nor  what  is  found  on  this  subject  in  the  writings  of  other  au- 
thors, whether  among  the  ancients  or  in  our  own  times,  lest  I 
should  be  unnecessarily  prolix,  especially  as  you  are  yourself 
extremely  well  furnished  with  their  works,  and  are  ready  to 
make  the  necessary  inquiry  into  their  sentiments.  I  will  tran- 
scribe for  you  my  own  meditations,  not  in  that  order  which 
is  suitable  to  the  nature  of  the  thing  itself,  (for  how  is  it  pos- 
sible for  me  to  do  this,  when  it  is  not  fully  known  by  me  ?)  but 
in  the  order  which  it  is  possible  for  me  to  observe,  in  the  con- 
fusion of  various  thoughts. 

It  will  not  be  useless,  in  the  first  place,  to  prefix  to  this  in- 
vestigation those  passages  of  Scripture  in  which  mention  is 
made  of  this  sin,  or  in  which  it  seems  at  least  to  be  made. 

"  Wherefore  I  say  unto  you.  All  manner  of  sin  and  blas- 
phemy shall  be  forgiven  unto  men  ;  bnt  the  blasphemy  against 
the  Holy  Ghost  shall  not  be  forgiven  unto  men.  And  who- 
soever speaketh  against  the  Son  of  Man,  it  shall  be  forgiven 
him  ;  but  whosoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it 
shall  not  be  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world  nor  in  the 
world  to  come.  (Matt,  xii,  31,  32.)  "  Yerily  I  say  unto  you 
All  sins  shall  be  forgiven  unto  the  sons  of  men,  and  blasphe- 
mies wherewithsoever  they  shall  blaspheme;  but  he  that  shall 
blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  hath  never  forgive- 
ness, but  is  in  danger  of  eternal  damnation."  (Mark  iii,  28, 
29.)  "And  whosoever  shall  speak  a  word  against  the  Son  of 
man,  it  shall  be  forgiven  him ;  but  unto  him  that  blasphemeth 
against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven."  (Luke  xii, 
10.)  There  are,  besides,  two  passages  in  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  the  first  of  them  in  the  sixth  chapter,  the  other  in 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLT  GHOST. 


513 


the  tenth,  which  it  seems  possible  to  refer  to  this  subject  with- 
out any  great  detriment.  "  For  it  is  impossible  for  those  who 
were  once  enlightened,  and  have  tasted  of  the  heavenly  gift, 
and  were  made  partakers  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  have  tasted 
the  good  word  "of  God,  and  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come, 
if  the  J  shall  fall  away,  to  renew  them  again  to  repentance  ; 
seeing  they  crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh,  and 
put  him  to  an  open  shame."  (Heb.  vi,  4-6.)  "  He  that  des- 
pised Moses'  law,  died  without  mercy  under  two  or  three  wit- 
nesses ;  of  how  much  sorer  punishment,  suppose  ye,  shall  he 
be  thought  worthy,  who  hath  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of 
God,  and  hath  counted  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  wherewith 
he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and  hath  done  despite 
unto  the  Spirit  of  grace?"  (x,  28,  29.)  To  these  may  be 
added  a  passage  from  St.  John's  first  epistle  :  "If  any  man 
see  his  brother  sin  a  sin  which  is  not  unto  death,  he  shall  ask, 
and  he  shall  give  him  life  for  them  that  sin  not  unto  death. 
There  is  a  sin  unto  death  :  I  do  not  say  that  he  shall  pray  for 
it."  (1  John  V,  16.)  Let  the  following  passage  also,  from  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  be  added,  for  the  sake  of  explanation, 
not  because  it  is  on  exactly  thi.  same  subject :  "  For  if  the 
word  spoken  by  angels  was  steadfast,  and  every  transgression 
and  disobedience  received  a  just  recompense  of  reward,  how 
shall  we  escape  if  we  neglect  so  great  salvation,  which  at  the 
first  began  to  be  spoken  by  the  Lord,  and  was  confirmed  unto 
us  by  them  that  heard  him,  God  also  bearing  them  witness, 
both  with  signs  and  wonders,  and  with  divers  miracles,  and 
gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  according  to  his  own  will  ?"  (Heb. 
ii,  2-4.)  To  these,  let  another  passage  be  subjoined  from  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  :  "  Ye  stiff-necked  and  uncircumcised 
in  heart  and  ears,  ye  do  always  resist  the  Lloly  Ghost.  As 
did  your  fathers,  so  do  ye."  (Acts  vii,  51.)  But  about  the 
same  persons,  it  was  said,  in  a  preceding  ciapter,  "And  they 
were  not  able  to  resist  the  wisdom  and  the  Spirit  by  which 
Stephen  spake."  (vi,  10.)  "And  all  that  sat  in  the  council 
looking  steadfastly  on  him,  saw  his  face  as  it  had  been  the 
face  of  an  angel."  (vi,  15.) 

I  unite  these  passages  for  no  other  reason  than  that  I  may 


514 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


be  able  to  contemplate  them  all  together  at  one  glance,  and 
may  direct  mj  thoughts  according  to  them. 

And,  first,  we  must  see  the  appellations  which  the  sin  re- 
ceives about  which  we  are  here  treating. 

The  Evangelists  Matthew,  Mark  and  Luke  call  it  "the 
blasphemy  of  the  Spirit,"  or  "  the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy 
Ghost."  In  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
it  is  called  "  a  prolapsing"  or  "  falling  away ;"  and  in  the 
tenth  chapter  of  the  same  epistle,  it  is  called  "  contumely  pour- 
ed on  the  Spirit  of  grace,"  or  "  a  doing  despite  to  the  Spirit  of 
grace."  I  might  add,  from  the  sixth  chapter,  "  the  crucifying 
afresh  of  the  Son  of  God,"  and  "  the  putting  of  him  to  an  open 
shame  ;"  and  from  the  tenth,  "the  treading  under  foot  of  the  Son 
of  God,"  and  "  the  profanation  of  the  blood  of  the  covenant," 
unless  they  were  capable  of  being  referred  to  some  other  thing, 
which  we  shall  afterwards  discuss.  In  1  John  v,  16,  it  is  des- 
ignated as  "  a  sin  unto  death."  The  sin  which  is  described  in 
Hebrews,  ii,  is  denominated  "  a  neglecting  of  the  salva- 
tion which  was  first  announced  by  Christ  and  his  apostles," 
and  confirmed  by  God  with  infallible  testimonies.  In  Acts 
vii,  51,  it  is  called  "  a  resisting  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Wq  are 
permitted  thus  to  employ  these  passages,  because  an  inquiry 
is  instituted  into  the  genus  of  the  sin. 

He,  against  whom  the  sin  is  committed,  is  styled  by  St. 
Matthew,  Mark  and  Luke,  "  the  Holy  Spirit ;"  and,  in  He- 
brews X,  he  is  called  the  "  Spirit  of  grace  ;"  by  this  addition  of 
the  epithet "  of  grace"  to  the  Spirit,  seems  to  be  intimated 
that  the  person  of  the  Holy  Spirit  himself  is  not  so  much  the 
object  of  consideration  in  this  passage,  as  some  gracious  act 
of  his.  The  same  Evangelists  make  a  distinction  between 
this  sin  and  that  against  "  the  Son  of  Man,"  while  in  Hebrews 
vi  and  x,  the  same  sin  is  said  to  redound  to  the  ignominy  of 
the  Son  of  God  and  of  his  blood — two  declarations  which 
must  afterwards  be  reconciled,  for  each  of  them  is  true. 

But  when  the  men  who  commit  this  sin  are  described,  in 
Hebrews  vi,  as  "  those  who  were  once  enlightened,  and  have 
tasted  of  that  heavenly  gift,  and  were  made  partakers  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  have  tasted  the  good  word  of  God,  and  the 


Sm  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


Sin 


powers  of  the  world  to  come,"  in  Hebrews  ii,  salvation  is 
said  to  have  been  announced  to  them,  and  confirmed  by  indu- 
bitable testimonies.  In  Acts  vi,  it  is  attributed  to  them  that 
"  thej  were  not  able  to  resist  the  wisdom  and  Spirit  by  which 
Stephen  spoke, and  that  they  "  saw  his  face  as  that  of  an  an- 
gel." From  these  particulars,  it  seems  proper  to  collect  by 
what  cause  they  were  impelled  who  committed  this  sin. 

It  is,  moreover,  attributed  to  this  sin  by  Matthew,  Mark  and 
Luke,  that  it  is  irremissible,  or  not  to  be  forgiven  ;  by  St.  John 
that  it  is  unto  death.  The  same  thing  is  affirmed  in  Hebrews  vi, 
but,  as  it  appears  to  me,  it  is  in  the  cause  ;  for  it  is  said  to  be 
impossible  that  he  who  has  thus  "  fallen  away  should  be  re- 
newed again  unto  repentance."  In  Hebrews  x,  in  the  appli- 
cation of  the  comparison,  this  sin  is  said  to  deserve  a  more 
severe  punishment  than  the  despising  of  the  law  of  Moses  ; 
and  in  the  commencement  of  the  same  passage,  the  certainty 
of  punishment  is  signified  by  these  words :  "  He  died  without 
mercy,"  which  seems  also  to  be  placed  in  the  antajpodosis^  the 
repetition  or  summing  up.  In  Hebrews  ii,  he  who  neglects 
this  salvation  is  said  "  to  receive  a  just  recompense  of  re- 
ward." 

Besides,  the  cause  why  that  sin  is  irremissible,  unto  death, 
and  why  the  man  who  thus  sins  cannot  be  renewed  unto  re- 
pentance, seems  to  be  rendered  in  Hebrews  vi,  in  the  follow- 
ing terms  :  — seeing  they  crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of 
God  afresh,  and  put  him  to  an  open  shame."  And  in  He- 
brews X,  in  the  following  words  :  "  — who  hath  trodden  under 
foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  hath  counted  the  blood  of  the  cove- 
nant, wherewith  he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing."  For  it 
does  not  seem  to  me  that  these  expressions  can  be  placed  col- 
laterally with  falling  away  and  doing  despite  to  the  Spirit  of 
grace ;  but  I  think  they  must  be  placed  in  subordination  among 
themselves. 

Lastly,  in  Hebrews  ii  &  x,  is  instituted  a  comparison  be- 
tween this  sin  and  the  violation  and  the  despising  of  the  law 
of  Moses ;  for  this  likewise  is  worthy  of  consideration,  that  we 
may  correctly  determine  concerning  the  kind  of  sin.  From 


516 


JAMES  AEMINTUS. 


this  comparison  of  it  appears  that  the  sin  about  which  those 
passages  treat,  is  not  committed  against  the  law  of  Moses. 

But  from  the  contexture  of  those  things  which  precede,  and 
from  a  comparison  of  those  which  follow,  is  to  be  taken  the 
occasion  through  which  Christ,  in  the  Evangelists,  St.  Paul  in 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  St.  John  in  his  first  epistle, 
have  made  mention  of  this  sin. 

Let  us  now  commence  an  inquiry  into  the  matters  which 
come  under  consideration  in  this  sin,  following,  as  far  as  possi- 
ble, the  guidance  of  those  passages  which  we  have  premised 
and  prefixed  to  this  our  disquisition.  But  to  me  it  appears 
possible,  most  commodiously  to  circumscribe  them  within  the 
following  bounds  :  Let  us,  in  the  first  place,  (1,)  enter  into  a 
discussion  on  the  genus  or  kind  of  this  sin  ;  (2,)  its  object  and 
mode;  (3,)  those  Who  commit  the  sin;  (4,)  the  impelling 
cause  ;  (5,)  the  end  of  this  sin  ;  (6,)  the  degrees  of  this  sin ; 
(7,)  the  peculiar  attribute  of  this  sin — its  irremissibilitj  or  nn- 
pardonableness,  and  its  cause.  To  these  we  shall  subjoin  the 
three  other  questions,  which  you  mention  in  your  letter.  (1.) 
Can  this  sin  be  known  by  the  human  judgment,  and  what  are 
the  marks  ?  (2.)  Are  those  who  are  commonly  considered  to 
have  perpetrated  this  sin,  to  be  held  as  being  guilty  of  it  or 
not  ?  (3.)  Does  not  this  distinction  between  the  sin  against 
the  iSon  of  Man^  and  that  against  the  Holy  Spirit^  contribute 
to  the  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  the  personality  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  ? 

1.  With  respect  to  the  genus  or  kind,  it  is  a  subject  of  much 
regret  that  a  disquisition  upon  it  is  a  matter  of  great  difiiculty. 
For  it  is  produced  from  no  other  source  than  the  too  great  fer- 
tility of  sin,  and  its  deduction  and  derivation  into  various  spe- 
cies ;  yet  it  is  not  necessary  to  refer  all  the  distributions  and 
distinctions  of  sin  to  this  point ;  we  must  descend  commodi- 
ously  by  those  degrees  which  may  bring  us  down  to  this  kind 
of  sin.  In  order  to  do  this,  we  must  commence  with  that 
which  is  the  highest.  Sin,  therefore,  is  the  transgression  of 
the  divine  law,  of  whatever  description  that  law  may  be ;  for 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLT  GHOST. 


517 


we  are  treating  upon  a  sin  of  this  kind.    A  transgression  of 
the  law  is  either  special^  against  one  or  more  of  the  precepts  of 
the  hiw ;  or  it  is  universal^  against  the  whole  and  entire  law, 
which  is  called  a  rejection  and  abrogation  of  the  law,  and  a 
defection  from  it,  and  which  is  as  much  against  what  is  com- 
manded or  forbidden  in  the  law,  as  against  him  who  directly 
commanded  it,  through  contempt  for  Him.    This  kind  of  sin, 
I  suppose,  is  signified  in  the  Old  Testament  by  the  phrase,  to 
sin  with  a  high  or  elevated  hand  /  for  the  moral  law  consists 
of  a  preface  which  is  contained  in  these  words  :  "I  am  the 
Lord  thy  God,  who  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt," 
&c.,  and  of  an  enumeration  of  the  precepts.    Either  the  pre- 
face itself  is  rejected  and  God  directlj^  despised,  or  sin  is  com- 
mitted against  the  precepts,  none  of  which  can  in  fact  be  vio- 
lated without  bringing  ignominy  on  the  divine  Majesty  and 
pouring  contempt  upon  God.    But  every  sin  is  not  from  a  con- 
tempt for  God.    David  committed  adultery,  which  may  be  re- 
ductively  or  consequently  referred  to  a  contemning  of  God,  and 
resolved  into  it ;  but  he  did  not  commit  that  sin  through  a  con- 
tempt for  God. 

The  law  of  God  is  now  two-fold — the  one  of  works,  the  other 
of  faith  ;  or,  the  precepts  of  the  law  are  of  two  kinds  :  some, 
of  the  law  properly  so  called,  and  others  of  the  gospel.  But 
this  sin  about  which  we  are  treating  is  not  of  the  kind  of  those 
which  are  perpetrated  against  the  law  of  Go  J,  whether  it  be  a 
special  or  universal  transgression  and  an  apostasy  from  the 
law.    This  is  evident  from  Hebrews  x,  28,  29  ;  for  this  sin  is 
there  compared  with  the  violation  or  abrogation  of  the  law  of 
Moses,  as  a  greater  sin  with  a  smaller  one.    It  is  also  evident 
from  Hebrews  ii,  2-4.    This  sin  is  also  called  "  a  doing  des- 
pite unto  the  Spirit  of  grace,"  which  is  not  that  of  the  law,  but 
the  Spirit  of  Christ  and  of  his  gospel.    It  is  easy  to  perceive 
the  same  thing  in  the  Evangelists ;  for,  in  St.  Matthew's  gos- 
pel, Christ  says,  "  but  if  I  by  the  Spirit  of  God  cast  out  dev- 
ils, then  the  kingdom  of  God  is  come  unto  you."  (xii,  28  ) 
This  sin,  therefore,  is  committed  against  the  Spirit  who  testi- 
fies that  the  kingdom  of  God  has  arrived ;  and,  on  this  ac- 
count, it  is  not  committed  against  the  law  of  God,  but  against 


518 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  same  thing  may  be  rendered 
evident  from  Hebrews  vi,  in  which  the  apostle  treats  about  a 
falling  away  from  those  gifts  which  are  there  enumerated,  and 
which  are  the  gifts  of  the  gospel  of  Christ.  Christ  is  also  said 
"  to  be  crucified  afresh  and  put  to  an  open  shame"  by  this 
"  falling  away  and,  in  Hebrews  x,  he  is  said  to  be  "  trodden 
under  foot,"  and  "  the  blood  of  the  covenant  is  said  to  be  pro- 
faned." All  these  are  sins  committed,  not  against  the  law, 
but  against  the  gospel  of  Christ. 

From  these  observations,  it  is  evident,  that  those  persons 
who  assert  that  this  sin  is  committed  against  the  acknowledged 
truth  concerning  God,  and  concerning  his  will  and  works, 
have  not  taught  concerning  it  with  sufficient  distinctness  ;  they 
ought  to  have  subjoined  "  against  the  truth  of  the  gospel." 
But  the  commands  of  the  gospel  are  two — that  of  faith  in 
Christ,  and  that  of  conversion  to  God.  Concerning  faith  it  is 
manifest.  About  conversion  let  us  now  inquire  ;  for  as  aver- 
sion from  God  is  produced  by  sin,  the  law  accuses  him  who 
is  thus  averse  or  turned  aside,  and  condemns  him  to  cursing, 
without  any  hopes  of  pardon  ;  but  the  gospel  requires  conver- 
sion and  promises  pardon.  Therefore,  conversion  to  God  is 
an  evangelical  command,  and  not  legal.  But  impenitence  is 
opposed  to  conversion  to  God ;  and  this,  when  final,  con- 
demns a  man  through  the  peremptory  decree  of  God,  that  is, 
through  that  which  is  evangelical.  This  final  impenitence, 
however,  cannot  be  called  "  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost," 
which  is  the  subject  on  which  we  are  now  treating.  For  (1,) 
final  impenitence  is  common  to  all  those  who  are  to  be  con- 
demned ;  while  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  attaches  to 
certain  persons,  or,  rather,  to  very  few.  (2.)  Final  impeni- 
tence is  not  committed  except  at  the  closing  period  of  life ; 
but  this  sin  is  perpetrated  while  he  is  still  running  the  space 
of  life.  This  is  apparent  from  1  John  v,  16  :  "  There  is  a  sm 
unto  death  ;  I  do  not  say  that  he  shall  pray  for  it."  (3.)  Con- 
cerning him  who  commits  the  sin  unto  death  it  is  said  that 
"  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  be  renewed  again  to  repentance  /" 
but  this  would  be  a  useless  expression  respecting  one  who  was 
finally  impenitent ;  for  it  is  well  known  that  all  hopes  of  par- 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


619 


don  are  terminated  by  the  short  course  of  the  present  life.  (4.) 
Respecting  the  sin  against  the  Holj  Ghost,  it  is  affirmed  that 
"  it  shall  not  be  forgiven,  neither  in  this  world  nor  in  that 
which  is  to  come that  is,  it  shall  never  be  forgiven.  But  it 
is  unnecessary  to  make  such  an  affirmation  concerning  final 
impenitence. 

This  sin,  therefore,  is  a  transgression  of  the  precept  which 
commands  faith  in  Jesus  Christ.  But  as  the  doctrine  concern- 
ing faith  in  Jesus  Christ  is  not  only  entire,  but  likewise  con- 
sists of  certain  parts ;  from  this  may  be  assumed  a  difference 
in  the  transgression,  that  one  is  universal,  the  other  special. 
The  universal  is  that  by  which  Christ  is  simply  rejected  and 
refused,  and  which  may  receive  the  general  appellation  of 
"  infidelity"  or  "  unbelief."  The  special  is  that  by  which 
Christ  is  not  universally  rejected,  but  is  merely  not  accepted 
as  he  has  been  manifested  in  his  word  ;  and  this  is  called  "  a 
heresy,"  that  term  being  employed  concerning  those  who,  af- 
ter having  professed  faith  in  Christ,  do  not  preserve  his  doc- 
trines entire  and  unsullied,  but  corrupt  them.  But  the  sin 
about  which  we  are  treating  does  not  lie  in  this  special  trans- 
gression. It  belongs,  therefore,  to  the  universal  transgression 
of  this  precept  concerning  faith  in  Christ ;  and  it  is  infidelity 
or  unbelief.  It  is  not  all  unbelief,  of  which  there  are  various 
kinds.  (1.)  The  infidelity  of  those  who  have  heard  nothing 
respecting  Christ ;  but  such  persons  do  not  commit  the  sin 
against  the  Holy  Ghost.  (2.)  That  of  those  persons  who  have 
indeed  heard  of  Christ,  but  have  not  understood  ;  (Matt,  xiii, 
19  ;)  neither  does  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  attach  to 
these  men.  (3.)  The  unbelief  of  those  who  have  understood, 
but  who  have  not  been  certainly  persuaded  and  convinced  in 
their  consciences  respecting  the  truth  of  the  things  understood  ; 
but  these  persons  are  not  guilty  of  the  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost.  (4.)  That  of  those  men  who,  being  convinced  in  their 
consciences  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  by  their  infidelity  still  re- 
ject him  ;  and,  according  to  my  judgment,  to  this  class  of  per- 
sons belongs  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  about  which  we 
are  now  treating. 


520 


JAMES  AEMmiUS. 


Therefore,  the  genus  or  kind  is  a  repulsion  and  rejection  of 
Christ  in  opposition  to  conscience.  It  is  not  a  mere  abnega- 
tion or  disowning ;  for  that  is  the  part  of  him  who  has  previ- 
ously made  a  profession.  It  is  not  an  oppugnation  or  attack ; 
for  that  belongs  to  further  progress,  [in  the  sin],  as  we  shall 
afterwards  perceive.  But  it  is  worthy  of  observation,  that  in 
reality  it  is  one  and  the  same  thing,  whether  it  be  called  "  a 
refusal  of  Christ,"  or  "  a  rejection  of  the  truth  concerning 
Christ,"  provided  a  universal  rejection  be  understood,  a:]d  not 
a  particular  rejection  in  one  doctrine  or  more. 

2.  Let  us  now  come  to  the  object.  The  object  of  this  sin 
is  said  to  be  a  person  against  whom  the  offence  is  committed, 
whether  that  person  be  God,  or  the  offending  mortal  himself, 
or  his  neighbor.  But  we  must  take  into  our  consideration  not 
only  the  object,  but  also  its  mode,  which  the  schoolmen  de- 
nominate "  the  formal  reason."  This  mode,  when  added  to 
the  object,  causes  the  latter  to  be  proper,  adequate,  and  pecu- 
liar or  suitable.  A  surface  is  an  object  of  sight,  but  it  is  one 
which  is  colored.  An  offence  is  committed  against  God  by 
ingratitude,  but  it  is  against  him  as  having  merited  better 
returns  from  us.  "We  also  sin  against  God  by  disobedience 
and  contempt,  as  against  him  commanding,  forbidding,  prom- 
ising, threatening,  chastising,  correcting,  &c.  Apostasy  is 
committed  against  God,  but  it  is  against  him  when  acknowl- 
edged as  God,  and  to  whose  Deity  and  name  he  who  falls 
away  had  devoted  himself  by  oath.  But,  in  this  place,  the 
object  of  the  sin  about  which  we  are  treating  is  Jesus  Christ, 
and  he  immediately.  This  is  the  reason  why  I  add  the  word 
"  immediately,"  because  he  who  rejects  the  Son,  rejects  also 
the  Father.  The  mode  of  formal  reason  has  been  manifested 
and  proved,  [to  the  man  who  commits  this  sin,]  nay,  it  has 
been  known  to  be  the  true  Messiah  apd  Eedeemer  of  the 
world.  This  is  evident  from  Hebrews  vi,  6,  in  which  those 
who  thus  "  fall  away"  are  said  to  "  crucify  to  themselves  the 
Son  of  God  afresh  and  put  him  to  an  open  shame."  It  is 
also  evident  from  Hebrews  x,  29,  in  which  such  persons  are 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLT  GHOST. 


621 


said  to  "tread  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  to  count  the 
blood  of  the  covenant  an  unholy  thing."  This  is  still  more 
apparent  from  the  words  of  the  Pharisees,  who  said,  "He 
casteth  out  devils  by  Beelzebub,  the  prince  of  devils,"  which 
are  thus  related  by  St.  Mark :  "  For  they  said,  he  has  an 
impure  spirit,"  whether  by  these  words  they  committed  this 
sin,  or  not;  for  they  contain  the  occasion  on  which  Christ 
began  to  speak  about  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  But 
because  this  mode  agrees  with  the  object  througli  some  gra- 
cious act,  which  proceeds  principally  and  immediately  from 
the  Holy  Spirit  or  the  Spirit  of  grace;  on  this  account  this 
sin  is  called  "  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost"  or  against  "  the 
Spirit  of  grace ;"  because  the  offence  is  committed  against 
that  act  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  either  by  despising  the  act,  or 
by  treating  him  a'so  with  ignominy.  But  that  act  of  the 
Spirit  is  the  act  of  testifying  concerning  Christ  and  the  com- 
ing of  his  kuigdom;  an  act  not  only  sufficient  to  prove  that 
Jesus  is  the  Christ ;  but  also  efficacious^  and  assuredly  convinc- 
ino;  the  mind  and  conscience  of  him  to  whom  the  testification 
is  communicated  concerning  Christ ;  the  operation  and  com- 
plete e^ect  of  which,  in  the  mind  of  man,  are  an  assured 
knowledge  and  persuasion  of  this  truth,  that  "Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God."  But  of  this  sin  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
not  the  object ;  for  \non  tendit]  it  is  not  directed  against  his 
person.  This  is  apparent  from  the  end  of  the  testifying  and 
the  object ;  for  the  end  of  this  testification  is  Christ.  But  the 
object  of  this  sin  committed  against  the  test'fication,  and  the 
object  of  the  testification  itself,  are  one  and  the  same.  And 
the  end  of  the  testifying  is,  not  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  that 
Jesus,  be  acknowledged  and  accepted  for  the  Son  of  God  and 
for  the  Anointed  of  the  Lord.  This  is  declared  by  Christ  in 
the  following  words  :  "If  I  by  the  Spirit  of  God  cast  out 
devils,  then  is  the  kingdom  of  God  come  unto  you."  It  also 
conduces  to  the  same  purpose — that,  not  the  Spirit  out  of 
Christ,  but  Christ  himself  in  and  through  the  Spirit,  per- 
formed the  miracles.  From  this,  it  appears,  that  the  perform- 
ing of  miracles  serves  to  prove  the  truth  of  the  preaching  of 
Christ  concerning  himself. 

34  VOL.  II. 


522 


JAMES  ARMINTUS, 


From  these  remarks,  I  think,  we  may  easily  solve  the  diffi- 
culty which  lies  in  the  words  of  Christ,  who  distinguishes  this 
"sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost"  from  "the  sin  against  the  Son 
of  Man,"  and  who  declares  that  the  former  is  irremissible  or 
unpardonable,  but  that  the  latter  is  capable  of  forgiveness. 
For  the  sin  against  the  Son  of  Man,  without  this  testification 
of  the  Spirit,  is  remitted  to  many  men  ;  and  it  appears  from 
the  whole  of  this  discussion,  that  regard  is  not  had  so  much  to 
the  person  against  whom  the  sin  is  committed,  as  to  the  act  of 
tes:ification  proceeding  from  the  Holy  Spirit,  agamst  whom 
the  sin  is  perpetrated.  With  respect  to  the  act,  therefore,  it  is 
said  to  be  perpetrated  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  not  against  the 
Son  of  Man,  but,  with  respect  to  the  object,  against  the  Son 
of  Man,  but  who  is  known  from  the  act  of  testifying.  Since, 
then,  regard  is  had  rather  to  the  act  than  to  the  object,  in  this 
respect  this  sin  is  called  by  Christ  "  the  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  and  is  distinguished  from  the  sin  which  is  committed 
against  Christ  without  any  consideration  of  this  mode  and 
formal  reason.  I  know  there  are  among  the  fathers  those  who 
understand  the  appellation,  Son  of  Man,"  through  a  redu- 
plication or  reflection,  to  signify  Jesus  as  he  is  the  Son  of 
Man,  and  the  epithet,  "  Son  of  God,"  to  signify  Jesus  as  he 
is  the  Son  of  God.  They  also  consider,  that,  when  a  sin  is 
committed  against  Jesus  as  he  is  the  iSo7i  of  Man,  the  offence 
is  another  and  a  less  one  than  when  he  is  sinned  against  as 
the  tSon  of  God.  But  such  a  consideration  has  no  place  here ; 
for  the  testification  of  the  Holy  Spirit  conduces  to  this  end — 
that  the  person  who  is  sometimes  denominated  the  Son  of 
Man  and  sometimes  the  Son  of  God,  be  received  as  the  true 
and  only  Messiah.  Yet  if  any  man  be  desirous  of  referring 
this  consideration  of  some  of  the  ancient  fathers  to  the  point 
under  discussion,  he  will  be  able  to  say  that  a  sin  is  commit- 
ted against  the  Son  of  Man  when  Jesus  is  not  recognized  as 
the  Son  of  God,  but  that  a  sin  is  committed  against  the  Son 
of  God,  when  it  has  been  already  proved,  by  undoubted  tes- 
timonies, that  he  is  the  Son  of  God.  The  expressions  in  the 
Evangelist  "  Whosoever  speaketh  a  word  against  the  Son  of 
Man,  it  shall  be  forgiven  him,"  serve  to  favor  this  considera- 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


623 


tion,  as  do  also  those  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  "  cru- 
cifjing  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God,"  and  they  who  have 
"  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,"  that  is,  Jesus,  whom, 
through  "the  enlightening"  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  had 
previously  accounted  as  "  the  Son  of  God."  For  it  is  mani- 
fest from  the  Scriptures  that  it  was  necessary  to  believe  this 
attribute  concerning  Jesus  of  Kazareth,  that  he  was  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  the  Savior  and  Redeemer  of  the 
world,  &c.  ;  and  as  the  object  and  the  acts  occupied  about 
it  have  a  mutual  relation  so  that  from  an  adequate  object 
we  can  determine  concerning  the  act,  and  from  an  act  we 
can  form  a  conclusion  respecting  the  adequate  object,  it 
appears  possible  for  us  to  conclude,  from  the  acts  which  the 
apostle  enumerates  in  Heb.  vi,  and  x,  that  those  persons  who 
had  thus  sinned  against  Jesus,  not  only  acknowledged  him 
as  the  Son  of  God,  but  also  sinned  against  him  as  against 
the  Son  of  God  whom  they  had  so  acknowledged.  For,  no 
one  is  said  to  "crucify  the  Son  of  God  afresh,"  and  to  "tread 
him  under  foot,"  except  that  man  who  acknowledges  him  as 
the  Son  of  God,  and  who  sins  against  him  under  that  con- 
sideration. For  instance,  the  American  Indians  cannot  be 
said  to  have  "  trodden  under  foot  the  gospel  of  Christ,"  when 
they  trampled  under  their  feet,  and  threw  into  the  fire,  the  small 
volume  of  the  Four  gospels,  which  was  shewn  to  them  by 
the  Spaniards,  who,  in  a  boasting  manner,  represented  it  to 
them  as  the  true  gospel. 

3.  Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  description  of  the  persons 
who  commit  this  sin,  that  is,  such  as  they  are  defined  to 
us  according  to  the  Scriptures.  But,  generally,  they  are 
those  who,  through  the  testification  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
their  minds  and  consciences,  are  convinced  of  this  truth — 
that  Jesus,  the  son  of  Mary,  is  Christ  the  Son  of  God.  Yet 
.these  persons  may  difier  among  themselves,  and  in  reality  do 
dififer ;  for,  after  having  been  convinced  of  this  truth,  they 
either  immediately  reject  Christ,  never  tendering  him  their 
names  to  be  enrolled  among  his  followers  ;  or,  having  for  a 
season  embraced  and  professed  Christ,  they  decline  from  him 


624 


JAMES  ARMINTUS. 


and  fall  away.    Of  the  first  of  these  two  classes  were  the 
Pharisees,  if,  at  the  time  when  they  said  that  "  Christ  cast  out 
devils  through  Beelzebu'.),"  they  were  convinced  in  their  con- 
sciences that  such  ejectment  of  the  devils  was  truly  the  work 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  Christ  had  laid  down  his  argument, 
"  If  I  by  the  Spirit  of  God  cast  out  devils,  by  whom  do  your 
sons  cast  them  out  ?"    Of  the  second  class,  are  those  of  whom 
mention  is  made  in  Heb.  vi  and  x.    For  they  who  embrace 
Christ  even  with  a  temporary  faith,  do  this  through  the  illu- 
mination of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  because  "  no  man  can  say  that 
Jesus  is  the  Lord,  except  by  the  Holy  Ghost."  (1  Cor.  xii,  3.) 
To  these  persons  has  been  granted  some  "  taste  of  the  heav- 
enly gift,  of  the  good  word  of  God,  and  of  the  powers  of  the 
world  to  come     for  the  testification  of  the  Holy  Spirit  con- 
cerning Jesus  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  when  impressed  with  a 
full  persuasion  on  the  mind,  can  be  followed  by  no  other  efiect 
than  the  excitement  of  joy  and  gladness  in  the  heart  of  him 
who  professes  Christ,  as  Christ  himself  declares,  in  Matthew 
xiii,  20,  "  But  he  that  received  the  seed  into  stony  places,  the 
same  is  he  that  heareth  the  word,  and  anon  with  joy  receiv- 
eth  it,"  and  as  he  also  declares,  in  John  v,  35,  concerning 
those  who  "  were  willing  for  a  season  to  rejoice  in  the  light  of 
John  the  Baptist."    But  on  this  subject  consult  Calviii's  In- 
stitutes.  (Zi^.  iii,  cap.     sec,  11.)    "With  regard  to  what  is 
added  in  Heb.  vi,  5,  that  the  same  persons    were  made  parta- 
kers of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  this  may  be  understood  to  relate  to 
those  extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  at  that 
period  flourished  in  the  church.    This  is  likewise  declared  in 
Heb  ii,  4 :  "  God  likewise  bare  them  witness,  both  with  signs 
and  wonders,  and  with  divers  miracles,  and  gifts  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  according  to  his  own  will."    In  these  persons,  that 
abnegation  or  renouncing  of  Christ  occurs  which,  in  Hebrews 
vi,  is  denominated  "  a  falling  away,"  that  is,  from  the  truth 
which  they  have  acknowledged,  and  from  the  confession  of 
the  name  of  Christ  which  they  have  made.    About  this  re- 
nunciation of  himself,  Christ  treats  in  a  general  manner  in 
Luke  xii,  9,  subjoining  to  that  passage  a  special  mode  in  the 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


525 


particukr  deed  which  we  are  now  discussing,  and  says,  "Who- 
soever sLa'l  speak  a  word  against  the  Son  of  Man,  it  shall 
be  forgiven  him  ;  but  unto  him  that  blaspheraeth  against  the 
Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  be  forgiven."  To  this  genus  of  re- 
nunciation belongs  the  des  of  Peter  ;  but  it  is  distinct,  and 
differs  greatly  from  this  species^  as  will  be  very  apparent  in 
the  next  member  that  comes  under  our  consideration.  There- 
fore, the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  is  distinguished  accord- 
ing to  the  mode  of  efficient  causes,  of  which  we  have  already 
adduced  a  distinction. 

4.  It  follows  that  we  now  institute  an  inquiry  into  the 
cause  of  this  sin.  The  cause  of  all  sin  is  commonly  represented 
to  be  either  ignorance,  weakness,  or  malice.  Ignorance^  not 
negative,  but  privative  of  the  knowledge  which  ought  to  be 
w^itfi  n,  and,  therefore,  ignorance  of  the  law.  Weakness^  too 
infirm  to  resist  vehement  passion  and  temptation,  and  the  se- 
ductions which  impel  men  to  sin.  Malice^  by  which  any  one 
knowingly  and  willingly,  being  enticed  indeed  by  some  temp- 
tation, but  wh''ch  can  be  easily  resisted  by  the  will,  and  which 
the  will  is  able  readily  to  overcome,  is  induced  to  sin.  Though 
ignorance  and  infirmity  are  not  directly  and  immediately  the 
causes  of  sin,  yet  they  are  causes  through  the  mode  of  pro- 
hibiting absence — ignorance^  through  the  mode  of  the  absence 
of  right  know  edge  and  reason,  which  might  be  able  to  hin- 
der from  sin  by  instructing  the  will — infirmity^  through  the 
mode  of  the  absence  of  \yirtutis']  strength  and  capability, 
which  might  hinder  from  sin  by  confirming  and  invigorating 
the  will.  If,  therefore,  we  be  desirous  accurately  to  examine 
this  matter,  the  will  is  the  proper,  adequate  and  immediate 
cause  of  sin,  and  has  two  motives  and  incentives  to  commit 
ein,  the  one  internal,  the  other  external,  llie  internal^  which 
lies  in  man  himself,  is  the  love  of  himself  and  a  concupiscence 
or  lusting  after  temporal  things,  or  of  the  blessings  which  are 
visible.  The  external  motive  is  an  object  moving  the  appetite 
or  desire ;  such  objects  are  honors,  riches,  pleasures,  life,  health 
and  soundness,  friends,  country,  and  similar  things,  the  con- 
traries to  which  the  man  hates  and  execrates,  and  is  afraid  of 


526 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


them,  if  he  imagine  them  to  be  impending  over  him.  But 
these  motives  do  not  move  the  will  so  efficaciously  that  the 
will  is  necessarily  moved  ;  fur,  iu  this  case,  the  will  would  be 
excusable  from  sin  ;  but  thej  move  the  will  through  the  mode 
of  suasion  and  enticement.  But  now,  when,  through  love  of 
himself  and  the  desire  of  some  apparent  good,  (in  which  is 
included  an  avoiding  or  hatred  of  an  apparent  evil,)  man  is 
solicited  or  enticed  to  some  act,  which  is  indeed  forbidden, 
but  which  he  does  not  know  to  be  sinful,  then  the  will,  follow- 
ing the  appetite  and  erroneous  reason,  is  said  to  sin  through 
ignorance.  But  when,  through  the  same  motives,  he  is  tempted 
to  an  act  which  he  knows  to  be  sin,  then  the  will,  following 
the  appetite,  sins  indeed  knowingly ;  but  whether  such  sin  is 
committed  through  infirmity  or  through  malice^  ought  to  be 
decided  chiefly  from  the  necessity  of  that  good  which  the  man 
is  pursuing,  and  from  the  deep  heinousness  of  the  evil  which 
he  avoids.  On  this  point,  a  judgment  must  also  be  formed 
from  the  vehemence  of  the  appetite  or  passion,  as  well  as  from 
the  inclination  towards  the  person  who  seems  desirous  to  hin- 
der the  completion  or  fulfilling  of  the  desire,  (a  circumstance 
which  does  not  on  every  occasion  occur,  but  which  for  a  cer- 
tain reason  I  thought  must  be  added  in  this  place,)  where  a 
discrimination  of  the  mode  by  which  he  endeavors  to  hinder, 
comes  under  consideration,  whether  it  be  good,  lawful,  and 
commanded,  or  whether  it  be  evil,  unlawful  and  forbidden. 

Let  us  now  apply  these  remarks  to  our  purpose.  Paul  per- 
secuted the  church  of  Christ,  but  he  did  it  ignorantly,  being 
inflamed  with  too  great  a  zeal  and  desire  for  the  law,"  as  many 
of  the  Jews  also  crucified  Christ,  being  ignorant  that  he  was 
the  Lord  of  glory  ;  otherwise  they  would  have  refrained  from 
such  a  nefarious  crime.  By  those  men,  therefore,  the  sin  about 
which  we  are  treating  was  not  committed.  Peter  denied 
Christ  his  Lord,  whom  he  knew  to  be  the  true  Messiah  and 
the  Anointed  of  the  Lord,  and  his  knowledge  of  this  was 
obtained  through  an  immediate  revelation  from  the  Father ; 
but  his  conduct  proceeded  from  a  desire  of  life  and  a  fear  of 
death — feelings  which  may  attack  even  the  bmvest  of  man- 
kind.  He  did  it,  therefore,  through  infi^rmity.   Through  fear 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLT  GHOST. 


52r 


of  banishment,  proscription,  condemnation  to  the  mines  or  to 
perpetual  imprisonment,  some  persons  have  shrunk  back  from 
a  confession  of  the  name  of  Christ ;  and  thej  must  be  con- 
sidered as  having  thus  sinned  through,  infirmity.  In  order 
to  recover  the  dignity  of  the  sword,  the  official  girdle,  &c., 
which  the  emperor  had  threatened  to  take  awaj  from  them 
unless  they  abjured  Christ,  some  of  the  early  Christians  re- 
tained all  their  honors  at  the  e^'  pense  of  denying  Christ ;  yet 
still  even  these  must  be  said  to  have  sinned  through  infirmity. 
Some  individual,  having  been  vehemently  tormented,  afflicted, 
injured  and  stripped  of  his  goods  by  a  Christian  prince,  or  by 
Christian  people,  breaks  forth  into  passionate  expressions  of 
blasphemy  against  God  and  Christ ;  yet  he  must  be  considered 
as  having  acted  thus  through  anger  and  dreadful  cowmoticn 
of  spirit.  But  if  the  persons  in  the  preceding  instances  were 
to  add,  to  this  their  sin,  hatred  against  Christ  himself  and  his 
doctrine,  according  to  my  judgment  they  would  not  be  far  from 
committing  the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  To  express  and 
conclude  the  whole  in  one  word,  I  affirm  that  this  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  properly  committed  through  malice.  I 
understand,  here,  malice  of  two  kinds  :  The  one,  by  which  no 
resistance  is  offered  to  concupiscence  or  desire,  when  that  can 
easily  be  done,  without  much  inconvenience ;  the  other,  by 
which  Christ  himself  is  hated,  either  because  he  endeavors,  by 
his  precepts,  to  hinder  the  completion  or  fulfillment  of  the 
unlawful  desire ;  or  because  the  enjoyment  of  such  illicit  desire 
is  not  permitted,  on  account  of  his  cause  and  name.  Both 
kinds  of  this  malice  were  in  those  Jews  with  whom  Christ  had 
the  transaction  which  is  mentioned  in  Matthew  xii.  But  they 
do  not  seem  then  to  have  been  fully  convinced  in  their  con- 
sciences, that  Jesus  was  the  Christ  and  the  promised  Messiah. 
Let  us  add,  therefore,  to  the  other  parts  of  the  definition  of 
this  sin,  that  it  is  committed  through  malice  and  hatred  against 
Christ,  or  through  hatred  of  Christ  and  of  the  truth  concerning 
him.  This  hatred  I  think  is  included  in  the  words  employed 
by  the  apost'e  in  Hebrews  vi  &  x  ;  for  such  persons  are  there 
said  "  to  crucify  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh  and  put 
him  to  an  open  shame,  to  tread  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  to 


528 


JAMES  AKMINIUS 


count  the  blood  of  the  covenant  an  unholy  thing,  and  to  do 
despite  unto  the  Spirit  of  grace."  I  suppose,  by  these  words, 
are  signified,  not  the  results  which  happen  to  those  who,  be- 
yond expectation,  fall  away  or  decline  from  Christ  through 
their  sin  ;  but  the  acts  which,  of  themselves,  and  by  their  own 
nature  are  allied  to  their  sin,  and  w^hich  have  an  affinity  with, 
and  are  consequences  from,  the  same  sin,  not  without  the  fixed 
purpose  of  those  by  whom  it  is  committed. 

5.  To  this  cause,  we  will  commodiously  subjoin  an  end  ;  for 
they  correspond,  for  the  most  part,  between  themselves,  and  in  a 
certain  respect  agree  with  each  other.  The  end,  therefore,  Is  two- 
fold. The  one  is  the  obtaining  and  the  enjoyment  of  an  apparent 
good  which  has  been  desired  ;  the  other  is  the  completion  of 
hatred,  and  the  rejection  of  Christ  and  of  his  acknowledged 
truth,  which  Calvin  has  enunciiited  in  these  words ;  " — for 
this  purpose,  that  they  may  resist."  By  this  very  circumstance, 
is  signified  the  malice  of  the  man  who  thus  sins,  which,  not 
content  with  obtaining  the  apparent  go  )d  through  the  act  of 
sin,  is  delighted  even  with  the  very  act  of  sin  as  wdth  its  end 
or  intention.  This  is  a  certain  sign,  that  the  w^ill  of  this  man 
has  not  been  impelled  by  inclination  or  passion  to  perpetrate 
this  crime,  but  that  it  has  freely  followed  the  inclination,  and 
has  added  of  its  own  this  other  thing — hatred  against  Christ, 
from  which,  this  hatred  may  be  said  to  be  entirely  voluntary, 
and,  therefore,  arising  from  malice.  For  as  appetite  or  desire 
is  attributed  to  the  conoupisGible  faculty^  infirmity  to  the  irasci- 
ble^ and  ignorance  to  the  reason  or  mind^  so  is  malice  attribu- 
ted to  the  will. 

But  from  these  things,  considered  in  this  manner,  it  seems 
the  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  may  be  thus  defined :  "  The 
sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  rejection  and  refusing  of 
Jesus  Christ  through  \_destinati\  determined  malice  and  hatred 
against  Christ,  who,  through  the  testifying  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
has  been  assuredly  acknowledged  for  the  Son  of  God,  (or, 
which  is  the  same  thing,  the  rejection  and  refusing  of  the  ac- 
knowledged universal  truth  of  the  gospel,)  against  conscience 
and  committed  for  this  purpose — that  the  sinner  may  fulfill 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


529 


and  gratify  his  desire  of  the  apparent  good  which  is  by  no 
means  necessary,  and  may  reject  Christ." 

6.  Let  us  subjoin  these  observations  concerning  the  degrees 
of  this  sin.  The  following  degrees  of  this  sin,  it  seems  to  me 
possible  to  lay  down  in  a  commodious  manner  :  The  first  is 
the  rejection  and  refusal  of  Christ  acknowledged,  or  of  the 
acknowledged  truth  of  the  gospel.  This  degree  is  URiversal 
and  primary ;  and  it  holds  good  under  every  circumstance, 
whether  he  who  rejects  and  refuses  Christ  have  for  a  season 
professed  himself  to  be  a  discipb  of  Christ,  or  not — a  point 
which  we  have  already  discussed  under  the  third  head.  The 
second  degree  is  blasphemy  against  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  and 
against  the  acknowledged  truth  of  the  gospel.  The  third  is 
the  assaulting  and  persecution  of  Christ,  either  in  his  own 
person  or  in  those  of  his  members,  or  the  extirpatioa  of  the 
truth  acknowledged.  A  fourth  degree  may  be  added,  from  the 
difference  between  the  object,  and  the  act  by  which  that  object 
is  demonstrated  and  manifested  ;  and  this  is  blasphemy  against 
the  Spirit  himself,  or  against  the  act  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  For 
he  who  calls  Christ  "  a  wine  Vihher^''  "  afrietid  of  puUicans 
and  siuners^^''  seducer  and fcdse  prophet ^''^  while  he  owns 
him  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  sins  in  a  different  manner  from  him 
who  says,  that  those  miraculous  operations  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
were  performed  by  Beelzebub  and  w^ere  diaboLcal. 

T.  "We  have  now  arrived  at  the  seventh  division^  wdjich  re- 
lates to  the  adjunct  or  attribute  peculiar  to  this  sin,  that  is,  its 
being  irremissible  or  unpardonable,  and  the  cause  why  it  is 
thus  incapable  of  being  forgiven.  This  sin  is  called  "  the  sin 
unto  death,"  not  in  the  sense  in  which  all  sins  merit  death 
eternal,  and  that  are,  notwithstanding,  remitted  to  many  per- 
sons, as  they  have  believed  in  Christ  and  are  converted  to  God, 
but  because  no  one  who  has  committed  this  sin  against  the 
Holy  Ghost,  or  who  shall  hereafter  commit  it,  has  at  any  time 
had  the  felicit}^,  nor  will  he  have  it,  of  escaping  death  eter- 
nal.   It  is  called  "  irremissiblcj"  not  in  the  same  manner  as 

• 


530 


JAMES  ARMUaUS. 


that  in  which  unbelief  and  final  inpenitence  are  unpardona- 
ble, through  this  decree  o  God  ;  "  He  that  believcth  not  on 
the  Son  of  God,  is  condemned,"  and  Unless  ye  repent  and 
be  converted,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish,"  &c.  For  these  are 
conditions,  without  which  sin  is  forgiven  to  no  man.  But  it 
is  called  unpardonable"  in  this  sense,  that,  when  it  has 
once  been  perpetrated,  the  sinner  never  obtains  remission 
from  God,  and  never  can  obtain  it,  through  the  definitive  and 
peremptory  statute  and  decree  of  God,  even  though  the  of- 
fender should  live  many  ages  afterwards.  But  the  proximate 
and  immediate  cause  why  this  sin  is  unpardonable,  seems  to 
me  to  be  comprehended  in  these  words  of  the  apostle  in  the 
epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :  "  It  is  impossible  for  those  who 
shall  thus  fall  awa}^,  to  be  renewed  again  unto  repentance." 
The  efficacy  of  this  cause  proceeds  from  the  perpetual  and 
immutable  decree  of  God  concerning  the  nonforgiveness  of 
sins  without  repentance.  But  the  mind  cannot  rest  here ;  for 
it  is  further  asked,  "Why  is  it  impossible  for  those  who 
thus  sin  to  be  renewed  again  unto  repentance  ?"  The  solution 
of  this  question,  as  it  seems  to  me,  must  be  taken  partly  from 
the  causes  of  this  "renewing  again  unto  repentance,"  and 
partly  from  the  he'nousness  of'  this  sin,  as  described  by  the 
apostle  in  Hebrews  vi  and  x.  From  a  collation  of  these  pas- 
sages, it  will  be  manifest  why  those  who  thus  sin  "  cannot 
be  renewed  again  to  repentance." 

(1.)  Let  us  treat  on  the  causes  of  this  renewing  again.  Re- 
newing again  to  repentance  seems  to  proceed  from  the  mercy 
or  grace  of  God  in  Christ,  on  account  of  the  intercession  of 
Christ,  through  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  or  the  Spirit 
of  grace.  But  this  mercy  of  God,  intercession  of  Christ, 
and  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  are  not  infinite,  that  is,  they 
do  not  operate  according  to  the  infinite  omnipotence  of  God 
and  Christ,  and  of  his  Spirit ;  but  they  are  circumscribed  by 
a  certain  mode  of  the  equity  and  will  of  God,  of  Christ,  and 
of  the  Spirit  of  God.  This  is  apparent  from  particular  passa- 
ges of  Scripture.  Concerning  the  mercy  of  God^  "  God  has 
mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mercy;  and  whom  he  will,  he 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


531 


hardenetli."  Concerning /A^  intercession  of  Christy  "I  pray 
not  for  the  world."  Concerning  the  operation  of  the  Iloly 
Spirit^  "  whom  the  world  cannot  receive." 

(2.)  Let  us  now  consider  the  heinousuess  of  this  sin  from  • 
the  description  of  this  apostle,  who  says,  Those  who  thus  sin, 
"  crucify  to  tliemselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh,  and  put  him  to 
an  open  shame  ;  they  tread  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  count 
the  blood  of  the  covenant  an  unholy  thing,  and  do  despite 
unto  the  Spirit  of  grace."  But  I  account  these  acts  to  be  so 
black  and  diabolical,  that  we  must  affirm,  the  mercy  of  God 
in  Christ  is  circumscribed  by  no  bounds  whatsoever,  the  in- 
tercession of  Christ  is  concluded  within  no  space,  and  the 
Spirit  of  grace  can  be  hindered  by  no  malice,  if  God  does  not 
deny  his  mercy  to  such  persons,  if  C'nrist  intercedes  for  them, 
^nd  if  the  Spirit  of  grace  is  not  deterred  from  them  so  as  not 
to  exert  upon  them  his  gracious  efficacy.  Take  into  conside- 
ration the  difference  of  the  sin  which  is  committed  against  the 
law  of  God,  and  that  against  the  gospel  and  the  grace  of 
God  in  Christ ;  and  reflect  how  much  more  heinous  it  is  to  re- 
ject the  remedy  of  the  disease  than  to  fall  into  the  disease 
itself!  To  remove  from  his  hearers  tlieir  despair  of  pardon, 
St.  Peter  says  to  them,  after  having  been  convicted  of  the  s'n 
which  they  had  committed  against  Christ,  "  Kow,  brethren,  I 
wot  that  through  ignorance  ye  did  it.'"  (Acts  iii,  17.)  St.  Paul 
says  to  the  Corinthians,  "  For  had  they  known  it,  the}^  w^ould 
not  have  crucified  the  Lord  of  glory."  (1  Cor.  ii,  8.)  He  also 
says,  concerning  himself,  "  but  I  obtained  mercy,  because  I 
did  it  ignorantly  in  unbelief."  (1  Tim.  i,  13.)  Christ,  when 
hanging  on  the  cross,  and  as  the  Scriptures  express  it  in  Isaiah 
liii,  13,  while  making  intercession  for  the  transgressors,  said, 
"  Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  whj>.t  they  do." 
(Luke  xxiii,  34.)  The  Scriptures  declare,  respecting  the  Holy 
Spirit,  that  he  is  capable  not  only  of  being  grieved,  (Eph.  iv, 
30,)  but  likewise  of  being  vexed,  (Isai.  Ixiii,  10,)  and  of  being 
quenched.  (1  Thess.  v,  19.)  Whosoever  they  be  who  answer 
this  description,  and  crucify  Christ  long  acknowledged  by 
them  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  who  tread  under  foot  his  blood, 
that  blood  by  which  God  hath  redeemed  the  church  unto  him- 


532 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


self,  whicli  is  the  price  of  redemption,  than  which  nothing  is 
more  precious,  and  by  which  alone  the  gratuitous  covenant 
between  God  and  men  is  confirmed  and  established — who, 
against  their  consciences,  treat  the  Holy  Spirit  with  the  greatest 
contempt  and  disgrace,  and  who  sin  so  grievously  against  him 
that  no  sin  can  equal  this  in  heinousness  ;  it  follows  that,  to 
people  of  this  class,  is  [jiwe]  justly  and  equitably  denied  their 
being  renewed  again  to  repentance,  unless  we  completely  divest 
God  of  justice,  and  remove  from  his  free  will  the  administration 
of  divine  mercy.  When  we  have  done  this,  and  have  ascribed 
the  dispensing  of  salvation  to  the  infinity  of  the  divine  mercy  or 
goodness  only,  the  very  foundations  of  religion  are  then  over- 
turned, and  by  this  means,  life  eternal  is  assigned  to  all  men 
universally,  and  even  to  the  devils. 

If  any  one  supposes  that  the  affirmations  which  are  made 
in  Hebrews  vi  and  x,  belong  only  to  those  who,  after  their 
open  profession  of  Christianity,  shall  relapse  and  fall  away, 
let  him  know  that  contumely  and  reproach  are  poured  on  "the 
Spirit  of  grace,"  by  those  who  have  never  made  a  profession  of 
Christianity,  and  that  these  words — '^to  renew  them  again  unto 
repentance ^'^^  and  the  hloocl  through  which  h-,  was  sanctified,^^ 
seem  properly  to  belong  [talihus]  to  those  who  have  not  made 
a  profession,  and  that  the  remaining  parts  of  the  description 
belong  to  the  entire  order  of  those  who  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

Having  considered  the  preceding  matters  in  this  hasty  and 
slight  manner,  let  us  now  23roceed  to  investigate  those  three 
questions  which  you  proposed. 

I.  With  regard  to  the  first,  I  think  it  may  be  known  when 
any  one  has  committed  this  sin  ;  because,  if  this  had  been  im- 
possible, John  would  not  have  forbidden  us  to  pray  for  that 
man.  For  we  ought  to  pray  for  all  those  to  whom,  with  even 
the  least  semblance  of  probability,  the  mercy  of  God  has  been 
manifested,  for  whom  the  intercession  of  Christ  has  been  pre- 
pared, and  to  whom  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  has  not  been 
denied.  The  ancient  church  formed  a  similar  judgment,  wiien 
she  not  only  accounted  it  improper  to  pray  for  Julian,  the 
apostate,  but  also  actually  prayed  against  him.    But,  accord- 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


533 


ing  to  my  judgment,  an  indication  of  the  knowledge  of  this 
sin  is  aftbrded  by  acts  on  the  part  of  tliose  who  commit  it. 
The  first  act  is  that  profession  of  the  name  of  Christ  which  is 
neither  forced  nor  affected,  but  voluntary  ;  the  second  is  the 
rejection  of  Christ  and  the  abandonment  of  all  profession. 
If  to  these  two  acts  be  added  blasphemy,  opposition,  &c.,  the 
judgment  concerning  this  sin  is  rendered  still  more  evident. 

From  these  remarks,  it  is  manifest  that  the  judgment  of 
man  can  be  formed  only  concerning  those  persons  who  have, 
at  some  time  or  other,  made  an  open  profession  of  Christiani- 
ty, and  have  afterwards  relapsed  and  fallen  away.  For  it  is 
impossible  for  us  to  know,  except  through  [an  act  of]  divine 
revelation,  what  effects  the  testification  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
has  produced  in  the  minds  of  those  who  reject  Christ  before 
they  make  an  open  profession  of  him  and  his  religion.  This 
seems  to  be  intimated  by  St.  John,  when  he  says,  "  If  any  man 
shall  see  his  brother,"  that  is,  one  who  has  made  an  open  pro- 
fession of  faith  in  Christ,  "  sin  a  sin  which  is  not  unto  death, 
he  shall  ask,  and  he  shall  give  him  life  and  it  appears  to  be 
immediately  repeated  on  the  general  principle,  "  There  is  a 
sin  unto  death,"  which,  if  a  brother  commits,  I  do  not  say 
that  he  shall  pray  for  it."  Let  the  wdiole  history  concerning 
Julian,  the  apostate,  be  taken  into  consideration,  and  it  will 
be  rendered  manifest  that  the  judgment  of  the  church  in  that 
age  was  founded  on  the  two  acts  which  we  have  enumerated 
— the  former  being  the  public  profession  of  Christianitj^,  and 
the  latter  the  act  of  desertion^  blasphemy  and  persecution. 

II.  The  second  question  is — "  Have  Cain,  Saul,  Judas,  Ju- 
lian, Francis  Spira,  &c.,  perpetrated  this  crime  V 

In  regard  to  this,  I  say,  without  any  prejudice  to  the  judg- 
ment of  those  who  hold  other  and  perhaps  more  correct  sen- 
timents on  the  subject,  it  seems  to  me  that  Cain  did  not  per- 
petrate this  crime.  For  this,  a  probable  reason  may,  I  think, 
be  rendered  :  For  he  did  not  sin  against  grace  through  ha- 
tred to  it,  but  through  a  perverse  jealousy  for  grace,  and 
through  envy  against  his  brother,  because  Abel  had  obtained 
that  grace  which  was  denied  to  himself,  he  committed  the 
crime  of  fratricide.    Concerning  the  despair  which  is  atribu- 


534 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


ted  to  him,  we  Vnow  that  interpreters  differ  in  their  o 
and  though  he  may  have  despaired  of  the  mercy  of  God,  yet 
it  cannot  be  concluded  from  this  that  he  had  committed  the 
sin  about  which  we  are  treating;  for  despair  is  also  a  conse- 
quence of  other  sins,  and  not  always,  I  think,  an  attendant  on 
this  sin. 

The  sin  of  Saul  was  against  David  as  a  type  of  Christ,  whom 
he  pei'secuted  in  opposition  to  his  conscience ;  but  he  commit- 
ted it  with  this  intention — that  he  might  afterwards  preserve 
the  kingdom  safe  and  unimpaired  for  himself  and  his  posteri- 
ty. But  as  it  is  another  thing  to  sin  against  the  type  of  Christ, 
than  to  sin  against  Christ  himself,  (for  Saul  was  in  all  likeli- 
lood  ignorant  of  David  being  such  a  type,)  and  as  he  did  not 
entirely  decline  from  the  Jewish  religion,  it  has  to  me  the  air 
of  probability  that  Saul  did  not  commit  the  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

My  opinion  is  different  respecting  Judas  Iscariot;  for  I 
think  that  he  sinned  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  this  by  the 
two  indications  which  we  have  previously  laid  down.  For  as 
he  lived  three  whole  years  in  familiar  converse  with  Christ, 
heard  his  discourses,  saw  his  miracles,  was  himself  sent  forth 
with  his  fellow-disciples  to  preach  the  gospel,  and  was  so  far 
enlightened  by  the  Holy  Spirit  as  to  be  capable  of  executing 
that  office,  and  actually  did  perform  its  duties,  and,  having 
been  made  a  partaker  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  he  himself  perform- 
ed miracles,  cast  out  devils,  healed  the  sick,  and  raised  the  dead 
in  the  name  of  Christ,  it  cannot  remain  a  matter  of  uncertainty 
that  he  assuredly  and  undoubtedly  acknowledged  his  teacher, 
Jesus  Christ,  as  the  true  Messiah  and  the  Son  of  God.  How- 
ever, he  not  only  deserted  him  whom  he  had  thus  acknowl- 
edged, but  also  delivered  him  up  to  his  enemies,  that  sought 
to  put  him  to  death  ;  and  he  did  this  not  through  weakness  or 
Bcme  excusab  e  necessity,  but  merely  out  of  malice  and  pure 
hatred  of  Christ.  This  is  evident  from  the  history  of  the 
Evangelists,  who  relate  that,  at  the  moment  when  the  "very 
precious  ointment"  was  poured  on  the  head  of  Christ,  Judas 
departed  and  went  to  the  chief  priests,  and  bargained  with 
them  concerning  the  reward  of  his  treason,  which  conduct  was 


BIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLY  GHOST. 


535 


undoubtedly  adopted  by  him  to  revenge  himself  upon  Christ 
for  the  loss  of  the  three  hundred  pence,  for  which  the  ointment 
might  have  been  sold,  and  which  were  taken  away  from  him, 
by  Christ's  permission.  To  this  must  be  added,  that  the  Scrip- 
tures reckon  him  among  those  against  whom  David,  the  type 
of  Christ,  Ibrmerly  uttered  the  same  petitions  as  those  which 
St.  Peter  enumerates  in  that  passage,  (Acts  i,  2  ,)  as  having 
had  their  accomplishment  in  Judas. 

I  entertain  a  similar  opinion  respecting  Julian  the  apostate, 
whom  I  consider  to  have  completed  every  branch  of  this  sin 
through  consummate  malice  and  the  most  bitter  enmity  against 
Christ.  For  he  abandoned  Christianity,  poured  infinite  contu- 
melies on  Chi  ist,  and  persecuted  Christian  people  and  the 
Christian  truth  in  various  ways,  nay,  by  every  method  which 
it  was  possible  for  him  to  devise.  He  also  attributed  the  mir- 
acles of  Christ  more  to  the  devil  than  to  the  Son  of  God,  for 
which  reason,  the  church,  in  those  early  days,  prayed  against 
him,  and  her  prayers  were   eard  by  God,  and  answered. 

With  respect  to  Francis  Spira,  it  would  be  with  great  reluc- 
tance that  I  s'  ould  venture  to  pronounce  him  guilty  of  the 
sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  On  the  contrary.  T  incline  to  the 
opposite  opinion  respecting  him,  and  in  this  I  follow  the  judg- 
ment of  some  learned  men  of  the  present  age,  who  not  only 
acquit  him  from  the  guilt  of  being  charged  with  this  sin,  but 
who  likewise  do  nut  even  exclude  him  from  the  pardon  of  hia 
sins. 

For  (1,)  he  did  not  deny  Christ  himself,  but  declined  to 
make  such  a  confession  of  Christ  as  the  Papists  disapproved. 
(2.)  He  did  not  avoid  this  Protestant  confession  through  mal- 
ice and  hatred  of  the  truth  known  by  him,  but  through  weak- 
ness and  too  intense  a  desire  for  a  good  which  appeared  to 
him  in  some  degree  necessary  ;  for  he  feared  the  forcible  seiz- 
ure and  loss  of  his  goods,  without  which  he  supposed  it  to  be 
utterly  impossible  for  him  to  gain  a  livelihood  for  himself  and 
family.  (3.)  In  the  very  agonies  of  his  despair,  he  made  fre- 
quent and  honorable  mention  not  only  of  Christ,  but  likewise 
of  his  truth  which  he  had  professed.  (4.)  Being  asked  by 
those  who  stood  around  him  if  he  wished  God  to  grant  him 


536 


JAMES  AEMINIUS. 


pardon  for  that  offence  and  to  impress  the  assurance  of  it  upon 
his  mind,  he  replied,  that  theie  was  nothing  of  v/hich  he  was 
more  desirous,  nay,  that  he  wished  it  could  be  purchased  even 
by  the  greatest  torments.  The  purchase  of  it,  however,  he 
knew  to  be  an  impossibility — that  no  one  might  suppose  that, 
by  this  his  desire,  he  inflicted  an  injury  on  the  blood  of  Christ. 
(5.)  He  diligently  and  seriously  admonished  those  who  visited 
him  to  apply  themselves  to  the  mortification  of  the  flesh,  to 
renounce  the  good  things  of  the  present  life,  and  also  to  de- 
spise life  itself  if  the  cause  of  Christ  and  of  truth  were  to  be 
forsaken,  lest  they,  having  followed  his  example,  should  rush 
into  the  same  abyFs  of  despair  and  damnation.  All  these  par- 
ticulars [in  his  case]  served  as  inducements  to  many  persons 
[in  the  Yenitian  states]  to  withdraw  from  the  papal  church, 
and  to  unite  themselves  with  the  evangelical  or  reformed 
church  ;  and  to  some  of  those  who  had  entered  into  this  union, 
they  served  as  reasons  for  persevering  in  their  profession. 

HI.  With  respect  to  the  third  question,  I  anssver,  that  this 
sin  is  not  directly  committed  against  tlie  Holy  Ghost  himself, 
but  that  it  is  primarily,  properly  and  immediately  perpetra- 
ted against  his  gracious  act.  Yet  this  so  redounds  to  the  dis- 
grace and  contumely  of  the  Holy  Spirit  himself,  that  he  is 
said  to  be  blasphemed  and  to  be  treated  with  ignominy  by 
this  sin  ;  and  that  not  accidentally,  but  ^^er  5^,  of  itself.  But 
I  think,  from  this,  by  good  consequence,  may  be  deduced  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  not  some  property,  virtue,  or  power  in  God, 
usually  considered  by  us  under  the  mode  of  quality,  but  that 
it  is  something  living,  intelligent,  willing  and  acting,  distinct 
from  the  Father  and  the  Son  ;  upon  which  men  are  accustom- 
ed to  bestow  the  appellation  of    a  person." 

To  me,  this  seems  possible  to  be  proved  by  many  arguments. 
(1.)  Because  he  is  distinguished  in  opposition  to  the  Son,  wdiich 
ought  not  to  be  done,  if  he  w^ere  a  virtue  or  power  not  subsist- 
ing, communicated  to  Christ  by  the  Father,  by  Vvhich  he  might 
perform  miracles,  as  through  a  j^i'inciple  from  wdiich  he  has 
the  dominion  and  power  of  his  own  act,  and  not  through  a 
principle  which  itself  possesses  such  a  dominion  and  power. 
(2.)  Because  it  is  said  that  men  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost, 


SIN  AGAINST  THE  HOLT  GHOST. 


537 


and  blasphemy  is  said  to  be  uttered  against  the  Sj^irit,  and  he 
is  treated  with  scorn  and  contempt.  These  phrases  do  not 
seem  to  me  to  indicate  the  inbeing  of  the  Holy  Ghost  within 
God  and  Christ,  but  the  existence  and  subsistence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit;  especiall}^  as  this  sin  is  distinguished  from  the  ^in 
against  the  Son  of  Man,  which  ought  not  to  be  done  if  this  sin 
had  been  perpetrated  against  an  act  of  the  power  which  exists 
within  Christ  and  is  employed  by  him,  and  not  against  the  act 
of  the  powerful  and  operating  Holy  Spirit  himself;  for  as  there 
are  acts  that  appertain  to  persons,  (though  they  operate 
through  some  natural  property  of  their  ow^n,)  so  are  there  also 
^passions  belonging  to  persons.  If  any  man  rejects  the  gracious 
invitation  of  God  to  repentance,  that  sin  is  said  to  be  commit- 
ted against  an  act  of  the  mercy  of  God  ;  and,  in  this  manner, 
he  who  has  so  sinned  is  said  to  sin  against  the  mercy  of  God, 
but  so  that,  by  this  very  act  the  sin  is  properly  conmiitted 
against  God,  who  is,  himself,  the  author  of  this  gracious  invi- 
tation according  to  his  own  gratuitous  mercy.  ]S" either  could 
he  who  thus  sins  against  the  mercy  of  God  be  said  not  to  sin 
against  God^  hut  against  his  mercy ;  as  he  who  sins  against 
the  gracious  act  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  said,  in  this  passage, 
(Matt,  xii,  31,  32,)  to  sin,  not  against  the  Son  of  Man,  but 
against  the  Holy  Spirit. 

lY.  To  these  three  questions  might  be  added  a  fourth  : 
"  Can  the  mere  thinking  upon  the  perpetration  of  this  sin,  and 
the  serious  deliberation  about  its  commission,  come  under  the 
denomination  of  the  sin  itself^  and  receive  such  an  appella- 
tion, in  the  same  way  as  he  is  called  a  murdereT  who  is  augry 
with  his  brother,  and  as  that  man  is  said  to  have  committed 
adultery  in  his  heart  who  has  looked  upon  the  wife  of  his 
neighbor  to  lust  after  her  ?" 

I  reply,  that  this  does  not  seem  to  me  to  be  the  sin  itself  • 
for,  as  long  as  this  deliberation  continues,  so  long  flourishes  in 
that  man  the  efficacy  of  the  Holy  Spirit  employed  to  hinder 
that  sin,  until  he  finally  and  absolutely  concludes  about  the 
commission  of  this  sin,  having  spurned  and  rejected  the  resist- 
ance offered  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Such  a  conclusion  is  follow- 
ed by  the  sin  in  that  very  moment,  with  regard  to  the  refusing 
35  VOL  11. 


538 


JAMES  ARMINIUS. 


and  rejection  of  Christ,  not  with  regard  to  the  other  degrees 
enumerated,  which  the  man  produces  at  his  own  opportuni- 
ties, even  if  his  malice  and  hatred  of  Christ  did  not  cease  to 
impel  him  to  the  completion  of  those  degrees. 
Amsterdam,  March  3d,  1599. 


ERKATA. 


Page  11,  Line  16  from  top,  leave  out  the  word  "  diseases.'*^ 

"     82,  "  2  "  "  read  " argument" for  "agreement." 

"     82,  3  "  "  tor  "argreement"  read  "argument." 

«    46,  "  12  "  "  "   "  ilesh"  read  "Daleth;"  for  "Mend"  read  "Samech." 

"    49,  "  17  "  "  bottom,  for  "  God"  read  "  Good," 

"    51,  "  4  "      "  "  for  "  insanity''''  read  "  a  want  of." 

**     32,  "  6  "  *'  top,  for  "  no"  read  •'  now." 

"  137,  "  14  "  "  "     "   "  constantaneous"  read  "consentaneous." 

\  *'  223,  "  2  -'  "  "  insert  the  word  "freed" after  the  woi'd  "mind." 

■"  270,  "  5  "  "  "  for   "of"  read  "as." 

«  828,  13  "  "  "     "imitate"  read  "intimate." 

•*  839,  *'  13  "  "  bottom,  for  "  covend'''  read  "  coiw&rso.'''' 

**  423,  "  15  *'  "  top,  for  "  commif  read  "  omW 

«  461,  "  1  *'  *•  read "  university." 

*'  490,  "  8  "  "  bottom,  for  "  tantamount"  read  "  equivalent." 

"  498,  "  16  "  '*  top,  for  "any  other"  read  "otherwise." 

499,  "  3  "  "  "    "   "can  do  no  other"  read '-cannot  do  otherwise." 

500,  "  3  "  "  bottom,  for  "except he  who"  read  "  unless  he." 
«  507,  "  7  "  "  top,  "propitiatory"  read  "propitiation." 

Mere  typographical  errors  have  been  omitted. 


1 


^  f 


4- 


i 


